From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
Received: by sourceware.org (Postfix, from userid 48)
	id DE27F3858401; Thu,  2 Feb 2023 08:03:17 +0000 (GMT)
DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 sourceware.org DE27F3858401
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gcc.gnu.org;
	s=default; t=1675324997;
	bh=q+1qkdIcytvFUv6rKWlRxQRJptF58V/3NtMZwuSCufo=;
	h=From:To:Subject:Date:In-Reply-To:References:From;
	b=odE9yhljqncKpYff91YIMbHfjFbFDwXIkiMxmbZ3UA5j18dFmRI81wJYsR9t2mZn9
	 Xj8Xbliy1G/DXY4QWl8f1sAzJwNVHTRzkdrcBxk5oT3czhTXdl4cMCPE4sSVe4fIZW
	 68BMWyCz/3Vryczm3BMd1o/nK7F3S4qQA+Z8hg+c=
From: "tnfchris at gcc dot gnu.org" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug target/108583] [13 Regression] wrong code with vector division
 by uint16 at -O2
Date: Thu, 02 Feb 2023 08:03:10 +0000
X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC
X-Bugzilla-Type: changed
X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None
X-Bugzilla-Product: gcc
X-Bugzilla-Component: target
X-Bugzilla-Version: 13.0
X-Bugzilla-Keywords: wrong-code
X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal
X-Bugzilla-Who: tnfchris at gcc dot gnu.org
X-Bugzilla-Status: NEW
X-Bugzilla-Resolution: 
X-Bugzilla-Priority: P1
X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: tnfchris at gcc dot gnu.org
X-Bugzilla-Target-Milestone: 13.0
X-Bugzilla-Flags: 
X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields: 
Message-ID: <bug-108583-4-irMJEYpAYl@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-108583-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
References: <bug-108583-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
X-Bugzilla-URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/
Auto-Submitted: auto-generated
MIME-Version: 1.0
List-Id: <gcc-bugs.sourceware.org>

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3D108583

--- Comment #21 from Tamar Christina <tnfchris at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
>=20
> OK, so that's an ADD_HIGHPART_EXPR then?  Though the highpart of an
> add is only a single bit, isn't it?  For scalar you'd use the
> carry bit here and instructions like adc to consume it.  Is addhn
> to do such thing on vectors?
>=20

So I think this is the only new IFN we'd need. basically we only need one
representing (a + b) >> n, for certain values of n we have a single instruc=
tion
for others we reject it.

So I think we can just do two of these back to back and that should work.  =
If
this is ok I can implement it today.=