https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111337
--- Comment #4 from rguenther at suse dot de <rguenther at suse dot de> --- On Tue, 12 Sep 2023, juzhe.zhong at rivai dot ai wrote: > https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111337 > > --- Comment #3 from JuzheZhong <juzhe.zhong at rivai dot ai> --- > (In reply to Richard Biener from comment #2) > > vect_patt_67.34_168 = VEC_COND_EXPR <mask__5.33_165, { 1, ... }, { 0, ... > > }>; > > vect_patt_68.35_169 = (vector([4,4]) int) vect_patt_67.34_168; > > > > -> > > > > vect_patt_68.35_169 = VEC_COND_EXPR <mask__5.33_165, { 1, ... }, { 0, ... > > }>; > > > > this one looks odd - it's probably > > > > /* Sink unary conversions to branches, but only if we do fold both > > and the target's truth type is the same as we already have. */ > > (simplify > > (convert (vec_cond:s @0 @1 @2)) > > (if (VECTOR_TYPE_P (type) > > && types_match (TREE_TYPE (@0), truth_type_for (type))) > > (vec_cond @0 (convert! @1) (convert! @2)))) > > > > the problem is that this happily produces a vec_cond we might not be able > > to expand - having the same truth type for the data type isn't enough > > if there's no optab with a matching data mode. Same for the view_convert > > case. > > > > It's a bit convoluted to ask for target support here, can you double-check > > it isn't possible to add native riscv expanders for the missing case? > > You mean support(In reply to Richard Biener from comment #2) > > vect_patt_67.34_168 = VEC_COND_EXPR <mask__5.33_165, { 1, ... }, { 0, ... > > }>; > > vect_patt_68.35_169 = (vector([4,4]) int) vect_patt_67.34_168; > > > > -> > > > > vect_patt_68.35_169 = VEC_COND_EXPR <mask__5.33_165, { 1, ... }, { 0, ... > > }>; > > > > this one looks odd - it's probably > > > > /* Sink unary conversions to branches, but only if we do fold both > > and the target's truth type is the same as we already have. */ > > (simplify > > (convert (vec_cond:s @0 @1 @2)) > > (if (VECTOR_TYPE_P (type) > > && types_match (TREE_TYPE (@0), truth_type_for (type))) > > (vec_cond @0 (convert! @1) (convert! @2)))) > > > > the problem is that this happily produces a vec_cond we might not be able > > to expand - having the same truth type for the data type isn't enough > > if there's no optab with a matching data mode. Same for the view_convert > > case. > > > > It's a bit convoluted to ask for target support here, can you double-check > > it isn't possible to add native riscv expanders for the missing case? > > You mean we should add "vcond" patterns back ? No, add the missing vcond_mask one? But maybe I'm misunderstanding the problem.
