I thought vsetvli insertion will try to merge them into one for those
cases? Could you explain few more reasons why they are not fused now?
Not an objection since I could imageing that would be easier to
process, just wondering why.
On Wed, Nov 8, 2023 at 2:11 PM Juzhe-Zhong wrote:
>
> Since our
On Wed, 8 Nov 2023, Kito Cheng wrote:
> OK, then LGTM, thanks for the explanation :)
Please don't top-post on a GCC mailing list (and preferably in off-list
replies to such mailing list messages unless it's been agreed to somehow
with the participants), as it makes it difficult to make context
e32m1TU
bb 2:
...
vle
vle
vse
juzhe.zh...@rivai.ai
From: Kito Cheng
Date: 2023-11-08 14:16
To: Juzhe-Zhong
CC: gcc-patches; kito.cheng; jeffreyalaw; rdapp.gcc
Subject: Re: [PATCH] RISC-V: Normalize user vsetvl intrinsics[PR112092]
I thought vsetvli insertion will try to merge them into one for
)
|
bb 3
I don't think we should do this on VSETVL PASS.
juzhe.zh...@rivai.ai
From: Kito Cheng
Date: 2023-11-08 14:16
To: Juzhe-Zhong
CC: gcc-patches; kito.cheng; jeffreyalaw; rdapp.gcc
Subject: Re: [PATCH] RISC-V: Normalize user vsetvl intrinsics[PR112092]
I thought vsetvli insertion wil
zh...@rivai.ai
>
>
> From: Kito Cheng
> Date: 2023-11-08 14:16
> To: Juzhe-Zhong
> CC: gcc-patches; kito.cheng; jeffreyalaw; rdapp.gcc
> Subject: Re: [PATCH] RISC-V: Normalize user vsetvl intrinsics[PR112092]
> I thought vsetvli insertion will try to merge them into one for
__
> juzhe.zh...@rivai.ai
>
>
> From: Kito Cheng
> Date: 2023-11-08 14:16
> To: Juzhe-Zhong
> CC: gcc-patches; kito.cheng; jeffreyalaw; rdapp.gcc
> Subject: Re: [PATCH] RISC-V: Normalize user vsetvl intrinsics[PR112092]
> I thought vsetvli insertion will try to merge them
On Wed, Nov 8, 2023 at 2:37 PM juzhe.zh...@rivai.ai
wrote:
>
> Another question raise to me.
>
> Is it necessary we have such many variant of vsetvls?
>
> I am thinking about redesign:
>
> __riscv_vsetvl_e8mf8
> __riscv_vsetvl_e16mf4
> __riscv_vsetvl_e32mf2
> __riscv_vsetvl_e64m1
>
> They are quit
