On Tue, Sep 27, 2016 at 09:58:20PM +0200, Jakub Jelinek wrote: > On Tue, Sep 27, 2016 at 09:29:10PM +0200, Florian Weimer wrote: > > Not sure if I read this code correctly, but if we fall through from > > V32HImode, and we have TARGET_SSE2 set, we execute this code: > > > > tmp = "p<logic>"; > > ssesuffix = TARGET_AVX512VL ? "q" : ""; > > > > And not gcc_unreachable (), as is probably intended. > > It really doesn't matter. > The instruction uses > (define_mode_iterator VI12_AVX_AVX512F > [ (V64QI "TARGET_AVX512F") (V32QI "TARGET_AVX") V16QI > (V32HI "TARGET_AVX512F") (V16HI "TARGET_AVX") V8HI]) > iterator (and, after all, ix86_hard_regno_mode_ok should ensure the same), > which means V64QI/V32HI will only show up for TARGET_AVX512F, V32QI/V16HI > only for TARGET_AVX (which implies TARGET_SSE2), and the slightly > nonsensical > gcc_assert (TARGET_SSE2 || TARGET_AVX512VL); > before the switch (the || TARGET_AVX512VL is pointless, because > TARGET_AVX512VL implies TARGET_SSE2 as well as TARGET_AVX2). > So, I'd go perhaps for (untested) following patch, first diff -up, followed > by diff -upb:
Looks good, are you going to test/commit it? Or should I? Marek