ilinpv marked an inline comment as not done.
ilinpv added inline comments.
================
Comment at: llvm/lib/Target/AArch64/AArch64InstrFormats.td:8055
multiclass SIMDFPIndexedTiedPatterns<string INST, SDPatternOperator OpNode> {
+ let Predicates = [HasNEON, HasFullFP16] in {
+ // 1 variant for the .8h version: DUPLANE from 128-bit
----------------
dmgreen wrote:
> ilinpv wrote:
> > dmgreen wrote:
> > > Should we have equal patterns to those below for f32 as well? So using
> > > DUP, D vector (4xf16) and possibly from a vector_extract too.
> > I'm worried about performance impact of change fmadd/sub -> fmla/ls in last
> > pattern case.
> What performance impact are you worried about?
I mean, can fmla/ls take more cycles that fmadd/sub, is it any performance
improvement of such replacement?
================
Comment at: llvm/lib/Target/AArch64/AArch64InstrFormats.td:8077
+
+ def : Pat<(f16 (OpNode (f16 FPR16:$Rd), (f16 FPR16:$Rn),
+ (vector_extract (v8f16 V128:$Rm),
VectorIndexS:$idx))),
----------------
dmgreen wrote:
> Do you mean the v4f16 variant of this pattern?
This pattern exactly replaces fmadd/sub to fmla/ls, so it is questionable
weather or not this pattern is useful.
v4f16 vector_extract variant has no any test cases at all.
Repository:
rG LLVM Github Monorepo
CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION
https://reviews.llvm.org/D78252/new/
https://reviews.llvm.org/D78252
_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
