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 567DC3858428; Mon,  6 Sep 2021 05:24:14 +0000 (GMT)
DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 sourceware.org 567DC3858428
From: "crazylht at gmail dot com" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug target/88473] AVX512: constant folding on mask does not remove
 unnecessary instructions
Date: Mon, 06 Sep 2021 05:24:14 +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: 8.2.0
X-Bugzilla-Keywords: missed-optimization
X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal
X-Bugzilla-Who: crazylht at gmail dot com
X-Bugzilla-Status: NEW
X-Bugzilla-Resolution: 
X-Bugzilla-Priority: P3
X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
X-Bugzilla-Target-Milestone: ---
X-Bugzilla-Flags: 
X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields: 
Message-ID: <bug-88473-4-9qbUiT62LQ@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-88473-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
References: <bug-88473-4@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
X-BeenThere: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: Gcc-bugs mailing list <gcc-bugs.gcc.gnu.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://gcc.gnu.org/mailman/options/gcc-bugs>,
 <mailto:gcc-bugs-request@gcc.gnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-bugs/>
List-Post: <mailto:gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gcc-bugs-request@gcc.gnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://gcc.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gcc-bugs>,
 <mailto:gcc-bugs-request@gcc.gnu.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 06 Sep 2021 05:24:14 -0000

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3D88473

--- Comment #9 from Hongtao.liu <crazylht at gmail dot com> ---
(In reply to Hongtao.liu from comment #8)
> (In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #7)
> > The UNSPEC_MASKOP ones are still there.
> >=20
> > PR 93885 is the same issue.
>=20
> void test(void* data, void* data2)
> {
>     __m128i v =3D _mm_load_si128((__m128i const*)data);
>     __mmask8 m =3D _mm_testn_epi16_mask(v, v);
>     m =3D m | 0x0f;
>     m =3D m | 0xf0;
>     v =3D _mm_maskz_add_epi16(m, v, v);
>     _mm_store_si128((__m128i*)data2, v);
> }
>=20
> Should be ok.
>=20
> Currently we rely on RA to choose whether to use mask register or gpr for
> bitwise operation, which means that if we remove UNSPEC_MASKOP, _kor_mask8
> will only generate gpr orb, to ensure the correspondence between intrinsic
> and instruction, UNSPEC_MASKOP is necessary, if the user wants GCC to
> optimize bitwise operation, it is recommended to use bitwise operator
> instead of intrinsic.

Similar for 88476=