Thanks for both your clarifications, committed. Thanks Nelson On Fri, Sep 1, 2023 at 2:37 PM Kiva Oyama wrote: > > Is the following expected? > > Yes. > > > Seems "vd is any" also has the same issue. > > I rechecked the spec, for every masked vmsge{u}.vx, the lowered > instruction is only masked when `vd != v0`. > So your patch does fix these two problems. > > Thank you for clarifying. > > Best Regards, > Kiva Oyama > > On Wed, Aug 30, 2023 at 1:51 PM Jan Beulich wrote: > >> On 30.08.2023 04:51, Nelson Chu wrote: >> > Hi Jan, >> > Thanks for pointing that out. >> > >> > Hi Kiva, >> > Maybe you can send a better patch for this issue if you are interested, >> > including what Jan suggested. Thanks :-) >> >> Hmm, both of your replies above make me suspect a misunderstanding: I >> think your patch does exactly what is needed. >> >> Jan >> >> > On Tue, Aug 29, 2023 at 4:52 PM Jan Beulich wrote: >> > >> >> On 29.08.2023 09:59, Nelson Chu wrote: >> >>> Is the following expected? >> >> >> >> I think so, but Kiva - please confirm. >> >> >> >>> Seems "vd is any" also has the same issue. >> >> >> >> Right, that's what ... >> >> >> >>>> I think this wants fixing alike in binutils: From looking at >> >>>> vector_macro(), >> >>>> it appears that emitting the masked form is merely an accident >> resulting >> >>>> from the inverted encoding of "masking". In particular, if masking >> was >> >>>> indeed meant, I expect code there would be >> >>>> >> >>>> if (vd == vm) >> >>>> { >> >>>> macro_build (NULL, "vmslt.vx", "Vd,Vt,sVm", >> vtemp, >> >>>> vs2, vs1, vm); >> >>>> macro_build (NULL, "vmandnot.mm", "Vd,Vt,Vs", >> vd, >> >>>> vm, vtemp); >> >>>> } >> >>>> else >> >>>> ... >> >>>> >> >>>> much like it is a few lines down from there. (Apparently the "else" >> path >> >>>> omitted above is similarly affected.) >> >> >> >> ... I was referring to with the parenthesized sentence. >> >> >> >> Jan >> >> >> > >> >>