On Fri, 10 Apr 2026 10:42:13 GMT, Jatin Bhateja <[email protected]> wrote:

>> Add a new  Float16lVector type and corresponding concrete vector classes, in 
>> addition to existing primitive vector types, maintaining operation parity 
>> with the FloatVector type.
>> - Add necessary inline expander support.
>>    - Enable intrinsification for a few vector operations, namely 
>> ADD/SUB/MUL/DIV/MAX/MIN/FMA.
>> - Use existing Float16 vector IR and backend support.
>> - Extended the existing VectorAPI JTREG test suite for the newly added 
>> Float16Vector operations.
>>  
>> The idea here is to first be at par with Float16 auto-vectorization support 
>> before intrinsifying new operations (conversions, reduction, etc).
>> 
>> The following are the performance numbers for some of the selected 
>> Float16Vector benchmarking kernels compared to equivalent auto-vectorized 
>> Float16OperationsBenchmark kernels.
>> 
>> <img width="1344" height="532" alt="image" 
>> src="https://github.com/user-attachments/assets/c8157c3c-22b0-4bc1-9de9-7a68cadb7b2a";
>>  />
>> 
>> Initial RFP[1] was floated on the panama-dev mailing list.
>> 
>> Kindly review the draft PR and share your feedback.
>> 
>> Best Regards,
>> Jatin
>> 
>> [1] https://mail.openjdk.org/pipermail/panama-dev/2025-August/021100.html
>
> Jatin Bhateja has refreshed the contents of this pull request, and previous 
> commits have been removed. The incremental views will show differences 
> compared to the previous content of the PR. The pull request contains one new 
> commit since the last revision:
> 
>   Review comments resolutions

test/jdk/jdk/incubator/vector/gen-tests.sh line 141:

> 139: 
> 140:   abstractvectortype=${typeprefix}${Type}Vector
> 141:   abstractvectorteststype=${typeprefix}${Type}VectorTests

I don’t see "abstractvectorteststype" being used anywhere. It might be worth 
considering removing it, along with 
"-Dabstractvectorteststype=$abstractvectorteststype" below, if it is indeed not 
being used here.

-------------

PR Review Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/28002#discussion_r3067113421

Reply via email to