On 4/26/23 15:45, Michael Collison wrote:
2023-04-24 Michael Collison <colli...@rivosinc.com>
Juzhe Zhong <juzhe.zh...@rivai.ai>
* config/riscv/riscv-protos.h
(riscv_vector_preferred_simd_mode): New.
(riscv_vector_mask_mode_p): Ditto.
(riscv_vector_get_mask_mode): Ditto.
(emit_vlmax_vsetvl): Ditto.
(get_mask_policy_no_pred): Ditto.
(get_tail_policy_no_pred): Ditto.
(vlmul_field_enum): Ditto.
* config/riscv/riscv-v.cc (emit_vlmax_vsetvl):
Remove static scope.
* config/riscv/predicates.md (p_reg_or_const_csr_operand):
New predicate.
(vector_reg_or_const_dup_operand): Ditto.
* config/riscv/riscv-opts.h (riscv_vector_bits_enum): New enum.
(riscv_vector_lmul_enum): Ditto.
(vlmul_field_enum): Ditto.
---
gcc/config/riscv/predicates.md | 13 +++++++++++++
gcc/config/riscv/riscv-opts.h | 29 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
gcc/config/riscv/riscv-protos.h | 9 +++++++++
3 files changed, 51 insertions(+)
diff --git a/gcc/config/riscv/predicates.md b/gcc/config/riscv/predicates.md
index 8654dbc5943..b3f2d622c7b 100644
--- a/gcc/config/riscv/predicates.md
+++ b/gcc/config/riscv/predicates.md
@@ -264,6 +264,14 @@
})
;; Predicates for the V extension.
+(define_special_predicate "p_reg_or_const_csr_operand"
+ (match_code "reg, subreg, const_int")
+{
+ if (CONST_INT_P (op))
+ return satisfies_constraint_K (op);
+ return GET_MODE (op) == Pmode;
+})
I don't see where this is used? Perhaps defer?
+(define_predicate "vector_reg_or_const_dup_operand"
+ (ior (match_operand 0 "register_operand")
+ (match_test "const_vec_duplicate_p (op)
+ && !CONST_POLY_INT_P (CONST_VECTOR_ELT (op, 0))")))
+
Similarly.
diff --git a/gcc/config/riscv/riscv-opts.h b/gcc/config/riscv/riscv-opts.h
index cf0cd669be4..af77df11430 100644
--- a/gcc/config/riscv/riscv-opts.h
+++ b/gcc/config/riscv/riscv-opts.h
@@ -67,6 +67,35 @@ enum stack_protector_guard {
SSP_GLOBAL /* global canary */
};
+/* RISC-V auto-vectorization preference. */
+enum riscv_autovec_preference_enum {
+ NO_AUTOVEC,
+ RVV_SCALABLE,
+ RVV_FIXED_VLMAX
+};
I think these were included in one of Juzhe's patches. So you can
probably drop them.
+enum vlmul_field_enum
+{
+ VLMUL_FIELD_000, /* LMUL = 1. */
+ VLMUL_FIELD_001, /* LMUL = 2. */
+ VLMUL_FIELD_010, /* LMUL = 4. */
+ VLMUL_FIELD_011, /* LMUL = 8. */
+ VLMUL_FIELD_100, /* RESERVED. */
+ VLMUL_FIELD_101, /* LMUL = 1/8. */
+ VLMUL_FIELD_110, /* LMUL = 1/4. */
+ VLMUL_FIELD_111, /* LMUL = 1/2. */
+ MAX_VLMUL_FIELD
+};
AFAICT these are unused. Perhaps defer this hunk?
So no real objections. There's one hunk that clearly shouldn't be
applied as it's in one of Juzhe's recently applied patches. There's a
few hunks that don't look like they're used -- if you have strong
reasons to believe they will be needed, go ahead and include them.
Otherwise drop them for now.
OK for the trunk after addressing the comments above.
jeff
