From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 42079 invoked by alias); 13 Dec 2018 16:17:08 -0000 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 Received: (qmail 42045 invoked by uid 89); 13 Dec 2018 16:17:07 -0000 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-5.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,GIT_PATCH_1,KAM_LAZY_DOMAIN_SECURITY,SPF_HELO_PASS autolearn=ham version=3.3.2 spammy=sized X-HELO: mx1.redhat.com Received: from mx1.redhat.com (HELO mx1.redhat.com) (209.132.183.28) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.93/v0.84-503-g423c35a) with ESMTP; Thu, 13 Dec 2018 16:17:01 +0000 Received: from smtp.corp.redhat.com (int-mx01.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.11]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mx1.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id C38CB3FBE3; Thu, 13 Dec 2018 16:16:59 +0000 (UTC) Received: from tucnak.zalov.cz (ovpn-117-214.ams2.redhat.com [10.36.117.214]) by smtp.corp.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4F33860155; Thu, 13 Dec 2018 16:16:59 +0000 (UTC) Received: from tucnak.zalov.cz (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by tucnak.zalov.cz (8.15.2/8.15.2) with ESMTP id wBDGGu5P027003; Thu, 13 Dec 2018 17:16:57 +0100 Received: (from jakub@localhost) by tucnak.zalov.cz (8.15.2/8.15.2/Submit) id wBDGGrLL027002; Thu, 13 Dec 2018 17:16:53 +0100 Date: Thu, 13 Dec 2018 16:17:00 -0000 From: Jakub Jelinek To: Richard Biener Cc: Richard Sandiford , gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] Support AVX512F masked gather loads (PR tree-optimization/88464) Message-ID: <20181213161653.GY12380@tucnak> Reply-To: Jakub Jelinek References: <20181212224310.GP12380@tucnak> <8F7358C6-507F-4DF5-923B-F807F9AD8465@suse.de> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <8F7358C6-507F-4DF5-923B-F807F9AD8465@suse.de> User-Agent: Mutt/1.9.2 (2017-12-15) X-IsSubscribed: yes X-SW-Source: 2018-12/txt/msg00945.txt.bz2 On Thu, Dec 13, 2018 at 05:09:17PM +0100, Richard Biener wrote: > Is there any chance you could look at replacing the i386 code to work with > the new IFN style used by Aarch64? Maybe for GCC 10, I'm afraid it is a lot of work mainly due to the weirdnesses of x86 mixed index vs. data sized types, that would be non-fun to represent in the optabs. Jakub