Useless vectorization of small loops

[Dorit Naishlos]

> On Mon, 21 Mar 2005 13:45:19 +0100 (CET), Richard Guenther
> <rguenth@tat.physik.uni-tuebingen.de> wrote:
> ...
>
> Uh, and with -funroll-loops we seem to be lost completely, as we
> produce peeling/loops for a eight times four rolling loop!  Where is
> the information about the loop counter gone??
>

the thing is you don't know at compile time what is the alignment of the
access you're peeling for, so the peel-loop has unknown number of
iterations, and consequently the "main" (vectorized) loop has unknown
number of iterations.

dorit


> Ugh.
>
> Richard.