This is the mail archive of the gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org mailing list for the GCC project.


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
Other format: [Raw text]

Re: [PATCH 2/8] Introduce VECT_SCOPE macro


On 06/14/2018 02:32 PM, David Malcolm wrote:
> The vectorizer code has numerous instances of:
> 
>   if (dump_enabled_p ())
>     dump_printf_loc (MSG_NOTE, vect_location,
>                      "=== some message ===\n");
> 
> In each case, the dump_printf_loc is a MSG_NODE at vect_location.
> 
> In almost all cases the message is of the form
>   "=== foo ===\n"
> 
> The exceptions are:
>   "===== analyze_loop_nest =====\n"
> which uses 4 equal signs rather than 3, and
>   "===vect_slp_analyze_bb===\n"
> which is missing the spaces.
> 
> In most cases (but not always) the message matches the function name.
> 
> This patch replaces all of these with a macro, taking the message
> as an argument (and forcing the use of three dashes and a space).
> 
> The idea is to later convert this macro to use an RAII type
> that pushes and pops scope, so that the nesting structure appears
> in the dumpfile and -fopt-info logs (and in the remarks and
> optimization records introduced later in this patch kit).
> 
> The message is usually the function name, but not always.
> Should I split this out into two macros? e.g. a VECT_FUNCTION_SCOPE
> that uses __FUNCTION__?
> 
> Would DUMP_VECT_SCOPE be a better name, perhaps?
> 
> gcc/ChangeLog:
> 	* tree-vect-data-refs.c (vect_analyze_data_ref_dependences):
> 	Replace dump_printf_loc call with VECT_SCOPE.
> 	(vect_slp_analyze_instance_dependence): Likewise.
> 	(vect_enhance_data_refs_alignment): Likewise.
> 	(vect_analyze_data_refs_alignment): Likewise.
> 	(vect_slp_analyze_and_verify_instance_alignment
> 	(vect_analyze_data_ref_accesses): Likewise.
> 	(vect_prune_runtime_alias_test_list): Likewise.
> 	(vect_analyze_data_refs): Likewise.
> 	* tree-vect-loop-manip.c (vect_update_inits_of_drs): Likewise.
> 	* tree-vect-loop.c (vect_determine_vectorization_factor): Likewise.
> 	(vect_analyze_scalar_cycles_1): Likewise.
> 	(vect_get_loop_niters): Likewise.
> 	(vect_analyze_loop_form_1): Likewise.
> 	(vect_update_vf_for_slp): Likewise.
> 	(vect_analyze_loop_operations): Likewise.
> 	(vect_analyze_loop): Likewise.
> 	(vectorizable_induction): Likewise.
> 	(vect_transform_loop): Likewise.
> 	* tree-vect-patterns.c (vect_pattern_recog): Likewise.
> 	* tree-vect-slp.c (vect_analyze_slp): Likewise.
> 	(vect_make_slp_decision): Likewise.
> 	(vect_detect_hybrid_slp): Likewise.
> 	(vect_slp_analyze_operations): Likewise.
> 	(vect_slp_bb): Likewise.
> 	* tree-vect-stmts.c (vect_mark_stmts_to_be_vectorized): Likewise.
> 	(vectorizable_bswap): Likewise.
> 	(vectorizable_call): Likewise.
> 	(vectorizable_simd_clone_call): Likewise.
> 	(vectorizable_conversion): Likewise.
> 	(vectorizable_assignment): Likewise.
> 	(vectorizable_shift): Likewise.
> 	(vectorizable_operation): Likewise.
> 	* tree-vectorizer.h (VECT_SCOPE): New macro.
OK.  But rather than using a macro, *consider* just using a normal
function.  I'm less and less inclined to use macros as I get older :-)

If there's a solid reason to use a macro, then that's fine.

DUMP_VECT_SCOPE seems better than VEC_SCOPE.
Jeff


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]