On Fri, Jan 12, 2024 at 4:18 AM Jun Sha (Joshua) <cooper.jos...@linux.alibaba.com> wrote: > > This patch series presents gcc implementation of the XTheadVector > extension [1]. > > [1] https://github.com/T-head-Semi/thead-extension-spec/ > > For some vector patterns that cannot be avoided, we use > "!TARGET_XTHEADVECTOR" to disable them in order not to > generate instructions that xtheadvector does not support, > causing 10 changes in vector.md. > > For the th. prefix issue, we use current_output_insn and > the ASM_OUTPUT_OPCODE hook instead of directly modifying > patterns in vector.md. > > We have run the GCC test suite and can confirm that there > are no regressions. > > Furthermore, we have run the tests in > https://github.com/riscv-non-isa/rvv-intrinsic-doc/tree/main/examples, > and all the tests passed. > > Co-authored-by: Jin Ma <ji...@linux.alibaba.com> > Co-authored-by: Xianmiao Qu <cooper...@linux.alibaba.com> > Co-authored-by: Christoph Müllner <christoph.muell...@vrull.eu> > > [PATCH v4] RISC-V: Introduce XTheadVector as a subset of V1.0.0 > [PATCH v5] RISC-V: Adds the prefix "th." for the instructions of XTheadVector > [PATCH v6] RISC-V: Handle differences between XTheadvector and Vector > [PATCH v6] RISC-V: Add support for xtheadvector-specific intrinsics > [PATCH v6] RISC-V: Fix register overlap issue for some xtheadvector > instructions > [PATCH v5] RISC-V: Rewrite some instructions using ASM targethook
All patches of this series got either "LGTM" or "OK": * https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2024-January/643339.html * https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2024-January/642798.html * https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2024-January/642799.html * https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2024-January/642800.html * https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2024-January/642801.html * https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2024-January/642802.html As mentioned earlier, I have rebased the patches, retested them locally and (after ensuring there are no regressions) pushed them. To all involved people: thank you very much! A special 'thank you' goes to Juzhe, who did a great job in reviewing the patches and providing suggestions to get the code into shape!
