public inbox for gcc-bugs@sourceware.org
help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug ipa/99785] Awful lot of time spent building gl.cc in Firefox
Date: Fri, 21 May 2021 07:29:17 +0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <bug-99785-4-JuqdsInDnT@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <bug-99785-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99785

--- Comment #19 from Richard Biener <rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
(In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #18)
> Also, __builtin_shufflevector allows to say -1 as a don't care element, our
> current infrastructure doesn't allow that, but it would be nice even for
> internal uses.  On the other side, I think __builtin_shufflevector allows
> only constant indices, while __builtin_shuffle allows arbitrary runtime
> reshuffling.

Yes, I think they complement each other.  The question would be whether we'd
want to represent both with VEC_PERM_EXPR on GIMPLE.  And how to present the
more flexible cases to the RTL expander and targets.  const permutes seem
to be handled via the vec_perm_const target hook and not the vec_perm
optab, so a possibility would be to create a new hook with relaxed mode
requirements - either by passing in three modes or some dummy RTXen.

OTOH it should be possible to handle some cases purely in the expander
by using paradoxical subregs when sources are of smaller size.  With
larger size sources the -1 would come in handy allowing for larger
results and subregging them.

  parent reply	other threads:[~2021-05-21  7:29 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 23+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2021-03-26  7:57 [Bug c++/99785] New: " mh+gcc at glandium dot org
2021-03-26  8:26 ` [Bug c++/99785] " pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org
2021-03-26  8:27 ` pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org
2021-03-26  8:29 ` pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org
2021-03-26  8:33 ` [Bug ipa/99785] " mh+gcc at glandium dot org
2021-03-26  8:41 ` pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org
2021-03-26  8:49 ` mh+gcc at glandium dot org
2021-03-26  9:08 ` mh+gcc at glandium dot org
2021-03-26  9:27 ` pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org
2021-03-26  9:29 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
2021-03-26  9:33 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
2021-03-26  9:35 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
2021-03-26 10:11 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
2021-03-26 11:16 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
2021-03-26 19:31 ` jmuizelaar at mozilla dot com
2021-03-26 21:38 ` hubicka at gcc dot gnu.org
2021-03-26 22:13 ` hubicka at gcc dot gnu.org
2021-03-31 13:32 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
2021-03-31 13:37 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
2021-05-21  7:29 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org [this message]
2021-05-21  9:35 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
2022-05-17 11:26 ` asolokha at gmx dot com
2022-05-17 15:09 ` jmuizelaar at mozilla dot com

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=bug-99785-4-JuqdsInDnT@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/ \
    --to=gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org \
    --cc=gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).