diff options
author | Sanjay Patel <spatel@rotateright.com> | 2020-11-14 08:04:14 -0500 |
---|---|---|
committer | Sanjay Patel <spatel@rotateright.com> | 2020-11-14 08:15:35 -0500 |
commit | 8ec7ea3ddce7379e13e8dfb4a5260a6d2004aa1c (patch) | |
tree | 7b19618d01ca0e812fed1d3afe71dc1374380e7a /clang/lib/Tooling/CompilationDatabase.cpp | |
parent | df09f825995b10da03f148133c119f52c94fd6e4 (diff) | |
download | llvm-8ec7ea3ddce7379e13e8dfb4a5260a6d2004aa1c.zip llvm-8ec7ea3ddce7379e13e8dfb4a5260a6d2004aa1c.tar.gz llvm-8ec7ea3ddce7379e13e8dfb4a5260a6d2004aa1c.tar.bz2 |
[CostModel] make default size cost for libcalls small (again)
This was changed recently with D90554 / f7eac51b9b3f
...because we had a regression testing blindspot for intrinsics
that are expected to be lowered to libcalls.
In general, we want the *size* cost for a scalar call to be cheap
even if the other costs are expensive - we expect it to just be
a branch with some optional stack manipulation.
It is likely that we will want to carve out some
exceptions/overrides to this rule as follow-up patches for
calls that have some general and/or target-specific difference
to the expected lowering.
This was noticed as a regression in unrolling, so we have a test
for that now along with a couple of direct cost model tests.
If the assumed scalarization costs for the oversized vector
calls are not realistic, that would be another follow-up
refinement of the cost models.
Diffstat (limited to 'clang/lib/Tooling/CompilationDatabase.cpp')
0 files changed, 0 insertions, 0 deletions