https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=127182

--- Comment #3 from rguenther at suse dot de <rguenther at suse dot de> ---
On Wed, 2 Sep 2026, jakub at gcc dot gnu.org wrote:

> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=127182
> 
> Jakub Jelinek <jakub at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:
> 
>            What    |Removed                     |Added
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------------
>      Ever confirmed|0                           |1
>              Status|UNCONFIRMED                 |NEW
>    Last reconfirmed|                            |2026-09-02
>                  CC|                            |meissner at gcc dot gnu.org,
>                    |                            |rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
> 
> --- Comment #2 from Jakub Jelinek <jakub at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
> So, do we want to introduce say vect_usad_qi effective target next to
> vect_udot_qi and use it in test like this where we actually need sum of
> absolute differences rather than dot product?

I think so.  I'm very much in favor of vect_<optab><mode> effective 
targets, possibly even <vector_mode> because of targets like x86
where different size vector mode support isn't always uniform
(but you'd have to match that up with vector-size effective targets
to be useable...)

Reply via email to