Richard Biener <richard.guent...@gmail.com> writes: > On April 14, 2021 5:10:26 PM GMT+02:00, Richard Sandiford via Gcc-patches > <gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org> wrote: >>Looking at PR99929 showed that we weren't dumping enough information >>about variable-length CONST_VECTORs. Something like: >> >> (const_vector:VNx4SI [(const_int 1) (const_int 0)]) >> >>could be either: >> >>(a) 1, 0, 1, 0, repeating >>(b) 1 followed by all zeros >> >>This patch adds more information to the dumps. There are four cases: >> >>(a) above: >> >> (const_vector:VNx4SI repeat [ >> (const_int 1) >> (const_int 0) >> ]) >> >>(b) above: >> >> (const_vector:VNx4SI [ >> (const_int 1) >> repeat [ >> (const_int 0) >> ] >> ]) >> >>a single stepped sequence: >> >> (const_vector:VNx4SI [ >> (const_int 0) >> stepped [ >> (const_int 1) >> (const_int 2) >> ] >> ]) >> >>interleaved stepped sequences: >> >> (const_vector:VNx4SI [ >> (const_int 0) >> (const_int 40) >> stepped (interleave 2) [ >> (const_int 1) >> (const_int 41) >> (const_int 2) >> (const_int 42) >> ] >> ]) >> >>There are probably better syntaxes, but hopefully this is at least >>an improvement on the status quo. >> >>Tested on aarch64-linux-gnu, arm-linux-gnueabihf, armeb-eabi >>and x86_64-linux-gnu. OK to install now, or should it wait >>until GCC 12? (It only affects SVE in practice.) > > Ok now (it should be harmless, no?)
Yeah, I hope so :-) Thanks, Richard
