From: Xiong Hu Luo
vmrghb only accepts permute index {0, 16, 1, 17, 2, 18, 3, 19, 4, 20,
5, 21, 6, 22, 7, 23} no matter for BE or LE in ISA, similarly for vmrghlb.
Remove UNSPEC_VMRGH_DIRECT/UNSPEC_VMRGL_DIRECT pattern as vec_select
+ vec_concat as normal RTL.
Tested pass on P8LE, P9LE and P8BE{
Ping, thanks.
On 2021/5/24 17:02, Xionghu Luo wrote:
From: Xiong Hu Luo
vmrghb only accepts permute index {0, 16, 1, 17, 2, 18, 3, 19, 4, 20,
5, 21, 6, 22, 7, 23} no matter for BE or LE in ISA, similarly for vmrghlb.
Remove UNSPEC_VMRGH_DIRECT/UNSPEC_VMRGL_DIRECT pattern as vec_select
+ vec_c
On Mon, May 24, 2021 at 04:02:13AM -0500, Xionghu Luo wrote:
> vmrghb only accepts permute index {0, 16, 1, 17, 2, 18, 3, 19, 4, 20,
> 5, 21, 6, 22, 7, 23} no matter for BE or LE in ISA, similarly for vmrghlb.
(vmrglb)
> + if (BYTES_BIG_ENDIAN)
> +emit_insn (
> + gen_altivec_vmrghb_dire
# 419 [c=4 l=4] xxswapd_v16qi
- vmrghb 0,0,1 # 420 [c=4 l=4] *altivec_vmrglb_internal
+ xxpermdi 33,0,0,2# 419 [c=4 l=4] xxswapd_v16qi
+ vmrghb 0,1,0 # 420 [c=4 l=4] altivec_vmrghb_direct
xxpermdi 0,32,32,2 # 421 [c=4 l=4] xxswapd_v16qi
Seems
Hi!
On Wed, Jun 09, 2021 at 04:03:43PM +0800, Xionghu Luo wrote:
> >>--- a/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/powerpc/builtins-1.c
> >>+++ b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/powerpc/builtins-1.c
> >>@@ -317,10 +317,10 @@ int main ()
> >> /* { dg-final { scan-assembler-times "vctuxs" 2 } } */
> >>
> >> /* { dg-f
Gentle ping, thanks.
https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2021-June/572330.html
On 2021/6/9 16:03, Xionghu Luo via Gcc-patches wrote:
Hi,
On 2021/6/9 07:25, Segher Boessenkool wrote:
On Mon, May 24, 2021 at 04:02:13AM -0500, Xionghu Luo wrote:
vmrghb only accepts permute index {0, 16,
Ping^2, thanks.
https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2021-June/572330.html
On 2021/6/30 09:47, Xionghu Luo via Gcc-patches wrote:
Gentle ping, thanks.
https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2021-June/572330.html
On 2021/6/9 16:03, Xionghu Luo via Gcc-patches wrote:
Hi,
On 2021/6/9
Hi, Xionghu
What's the status of the \M and \m testcase beautification requested
by Segher? Did you send an updated patch? Your messages ping the
version prior to Segher's additional comments.
It seems that the changes to the patterns are complete, but there are
remaining questions about the tes
Thanks David,
On 2021/10/13 06:51, David Edelsohn wrote:
> Hi, Xionghu
>
> What's the status of the \M and \m testcase beautification requested
> by Segher? Did you send an updated patch? Your messages ping the
> version prior to Segher's additional comments.
The pinged link already answered Se
