We were using the default getScalarizationOverhead expansion for extraction costs, which adds up all the individual element extraction costs.
This is fine for 128-bit vectors, but for 256/512-bit vectors each element extraction also has to account for extracting the upper 128-bit subvector extraction before it can handle the element. For scalarization costs we only need to extract each demanded subvector once.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D125527
The analysis passes output function name encapsulated in `'` braces,
but LV uses `"`. Harmonizing this may help in creating an update script
for the LV costmodel test checks.
Reviewed By: fhahn
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D121105
We ask `TTI.getAddressComputationCost()` about the cost of computing vector address,
and then multiply it by the vector width. This doesn't make any sense,
it implies that we'd do a vector GEP and then scalarize the vector of pointers,
but there is no such thing in the vectorized IR, we perform scalar GEP's.
This is *especially* bad on X86, and was effectively prohibiting any scalarized
vectorization of gathers/scatters, because `X86TTIImpl::getAddressComputationCost()`
says that cost of vector address computation is `10` as compared to `1` for scalar.
The computed costs are similar to the ones with D111222+D111220,
but we end up without masked memory intrinsics that we'd then have to
expand later on, without much luck. (D111363)
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D111460
Simon Pilgrim