https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=125949
--- Comment #6 from vekumar at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to Haochen Jiang from comment #5)
> I get the point, zen6 has xmm16+ support but no evex avxvnniint8 support,
> which is in avx10.2/avx10_v1_aux.
>
> However,...
>
> (In reply to vekumar from comment #4)
> > Changing this pattern helps
> > --Snip--
> > diff --git a/gcc/config/i386/i386.md b/gcc/config/i386/i386.md
> > index 912fc1af018..9d334f9115f 100644
> > --- a/gcc/config/i386/i386.md
> > +++ b/gcc/config/i386/i386.md
> > @@ -583,7 +583,7 @@
> >
> > sse_noavx,sse2,sse2_noavx,sse3,sse3_noavx,sse4,sse4_noavx,
> >
> > avx,noavx,avx2,noavx2,bmi,bmi2,fma4,fma,avx512f,noavx512f,
> > avx512bw,noavx512bw,avx512dq,noavx512dq,fma_or_avx512vl,
> > -
> > avx512vl,noavx512vl,avxvnni,avx512vnnivl,avx512fp16,avxifma,
> > +
> > avx512vl,noavx512vl,avxvnni,avxvnniint8,avx512vnnivl,avx512fp16,avxifma,
> > avx512ifmavl,avxneconvert,avx512bf16vl,vpclmulqdqvl,
> >
> > avx_noavx512f,avx_noavx512vl,vaes_avx512vl,noapx_nf,avx10_2"
> > (const_string "base"))
> > @@ -967,6 +967,7 @@
> > (eq_attr "isa" "avx512vl") (symbol_ref "TARGET_AVX512VL")
> > (eq_attr "isa" "noavx512vl") (symbol_ref "!TARGET_AVX512VL")
> > (eq_attr "isa" "avxvnni") (symbol_ref "TARGET_AVXVNNI")
> > + (eq_attr "isa" "avxvnniint8") (symbol_ref "TARGET_AVXVNNIINT8")
> > (eq_attr "isa" "avx512vnnivl")
> > (symbol_ref "TARGET_AVX512VNNI && TARGET_AVX512VL")
> > (eq_attr "isa" "avx512fp16")
> > diff --git a/gcc/config/i386/sse.md b/gcc/config/i386/sse.md
> > index bb150f6b5f9..3ab607a1197 100644
> > --- a/gcc/config/i386/sse.md
> > +++ b/gcc/config/i386/sse.md
> > @@ -32624,15 +32624,19 @@
> > })
> >
> > (define_insn "vpdp<vpdotprodtype>_<mode>"
> > - [(set (match_operand:VI4_AVX 0 "register_operand" "=v")
> > + [(set (match_operand:VI4_AVX 0 "register_operand" "=x,v")
> > (unspec:VI4_AVX
> > - [(match_operand:VI4_AVX 1 "register_operand" "0")
> > - (match_operand:VI4_AVX 2 "register_operand" "v")
> > - (match_operand:VI4_AVX 3 "nonimmediate_operand" "vm")]
> > + [(match_operand:VI4_AVX 1 "register_operand" "0,0")
> > + (match_operand:VI4_AVX 2 "register_operand" "x,v")
> > + (match_operand:VI4_AVX 3 "nonimmediate_operand" "xjm,vm")]
> > VPDOTPROD))]
> > "TARGET_AVXVNNIINT8 || TARGET_AVX10_2"
> > - "vpdp<vpdotprodtype>\t{%3, %2, %0|%0, %2, %3}"
> > - [(set_attr "prefix" "maybe_evex")])
> > + "@
> > + %{vex%} vpdp<vpdotprodtype>\t{%3, %2, %0|%0, %2, %3}
> > + vpdp<vpdotprodtype>\t{%3, %2, %0|%0, %2, %3}"
> > + [(set_attr "prefix" "vex,evex")
> > + (set_attr "addr" "gpr16,*")
> > + (set_attr "isa" "avxvnniint8,avx10_2")])
> >
> > (define_insn "vpdp<vpdotprodtype>_v16si"
> > [(set (match_operand:V16SI 0 "register_operand" "=v")
> > --Snip-
>
> ... we should not introduce vex prefix here since this is redundant.
Should I remove the below line ??
> > + %{vex%} vpdp<vpdotprodtype>\t{%3, %2, %0|%0, %2, %3}
