From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 32249 invoked by alias); 18 Nov 2009 14:20:22 -0000 Received: (qmail 32240 invoked by uid 22791); 18 Nov 2009 14:20:22 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-2.0 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,SPF_FAIL X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from mx20.gnu.org (HELO mx20.gnu.org) (199.232.41.8) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Wed, 18 Nov 2009 14:19:16 +0000 Received: from mail.codesourcery.com ([38.113.113.100]) by mx20.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1NAlNK-0004LS-SE for gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org; Wed, 18 Nov 2009 09:19:15 -0500 Received: (qmail 24339 invoked from network); 18 Nov 2009 14:19:13 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO wren.localnet) (paul@127.0.0.2) by mail.codesourcery.com with ESMTPA; 18 Nov 2009 14:19:13 -0000 From: Paul Brook To: Julian Brown Subject: Re: [PATCH, ARM] Misaligned access support for ARM Neon Date: Wed, 18 Nov 2009 14:25:00 -0000 User-Agent: KMail/1.12.2 (Linux/2.6.30-2-amd64; KDE/4.3.2; x86_64; ; ) Cc: gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org, rearnsha@arm.com References: <20091117171931.053faec2@rex.config> In-Reply-To: <20091117171931.053faec2@rex.config> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset="iso-8859-15" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-Id: <200911181419.10389.paul@codesourcery.com> X-detected-operating-system: by mx20.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.6, seldom 2.4 (older, 4) Mailing-List: contact gcc-patches-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: Sender: gcc-patches-owner@gcc.gnu.org X-SW-Source: 2009-11/txt/msg00927.txt.bz2 On Tuesday 17 November 2009, Julian Brown wrote: > This patch provides support for misaligned accesses (for the > vectorizer) for ARM Neon in little-endian mode, and some of the > infrastructure for support in big-endian mode also (though big-endian > support doesn't actually work yet). The ARM bits are OK by me, you'll need someone else to sign off on the other bits. One thing we did consider in the original implementation was whether the "movmisalign" patterns should be renamed. In the ARM scheme describing these as misaligned references it somewhat misleading. Instead we have "opaque" vector transfers (mov) and array data transfers (movmisalign). It's probably not worth the pain of renaming stuff, but I suggest adding commentary in the movmisalign section of tm.texi. Paul