From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <gcc-patches-return-333650-listarch-gcc-patches=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org>
Received: (qmail 4328 invoked by alias); 6 Dec 2012 13:42:54 -0000
Received: (qmail 4315 invoked by uid 22791); 6 Dec 2012 13:42:52 -0000
X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-5.0 required=5.0	tests=AWL,BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,FREEMAIL_FROM,KHOP_RCVD_TRUST,KHOP_THREADED,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW,RCVD_IN_HOSTKARMA_YE
X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org
Received: from mail-wg0-f53.google.com (HELO mail-wg0-f53.google.com) (74.125.82.53)    by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Thu, 06 Dec 2012 13:42:46 +0000
Received: by mail-wg0-f53.google.com with SMTP id ei8so2885063wgb.8        for <gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org>; Thu, 06 Dec 2012 05:42:45 -0800 (PST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.180.87.225 with SMTP id bb1mr2701899wib.20.1354801365642; Thu, 06 Dec 2012 05:42:45 -0800 (PST)
Received: by 10.227.200.78 with HTTP; Thu, 6 Dec 2012 05:42:45 -0800 (PST)
In-Reply-To: <CAMe9rOpdBqD3A+EVVqbkhaos7my2ZNkdOky89AOa8Ye0OkeEKQ@mail.gmail.com>
References: <alpine.DEB.2.02.1210131032460.9651@stedding.saclay.inria.fr>	<CAFULd4YHdLF1ZyxrMG8MhRjo40f-EfAJZnDOEBc80pOGa4WNGQ@mail.gmail.com>	<alpine.DEB.2.02.1210141057010.3752@laptop-mg.saclay.inria.fr>	<alpine.DEB.2.02.1211301317160.3783@laptop-mg.saclay.inria.fr>	<CAFULd4bVFbr1KC6FrjWOhEfmqEr_v2VuQMFjg4+TpTB681=HhA@mail.gmail.com>	<alpine.DEB.2.02.1211302244290.3783@laptop-mg.saclay.inria.fr>	<alpine.DEB.2.02.1212011800400.19206@stedding.saclay.inria.fr>	<CAFULd4Z=8xeVScUM7JSqkHHXJrmO7qVa40q-h-mUE+Vehb86vw@mail.gmail.com>	<alpine.DEB.2.02.1212021215330.3747@laptop-mg.saclay.inria.fr>	<CAFULd4Z4Ywk+BQupB+=tDKiWx5QrCt9VL83XF4Xtgu03=y0VZw@mail.gmail.com>	<alpine.DEB.2.02.1212030958050.3737@laptop-mg.saclay.inria.fr>	<CAFULd4a5my_Hre6k5kTUm2UqpBX06kKKe9jjMiFisBJSUJPxyw@mail.gmail.com>	<alpine.DEB.2.02.1212041436150.3790@laptop-mg.saclay.inria.fr>	<alpine.DEB.2.02.1212041715370.22183@stedding.saclay.inria.fr>	<CAFULd4aPuceLK0uBhoK-ZVvMi_TqkiwijNddYVL9B4iKaN358Q@mail.gmail.com>	<CAMe9rOpdBqD3A+EVVqbkhaos7my2ZNkdOky89AOa8Ye0OkeEKQ@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 06 Dec 2012 13:42:00 -0000
Message-ID: <CAGs3Rfvy96savuHk-=tDU0ixkt4ahz2LsQpWATkPX0Sg87+8_w@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [i386] scalar ops that preserve the high part of a vector
From: Kirill Yukhin <kirill.yukhin@gmail.com>
To: "H.J. Lu" <hjl.tools@gmail.com>
Cc: Uros Bizjak <ubizjak@gmail.com>, Marc Glisse <marc.glisse@inria.fr>, 	gcc-patches List <gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
X-IsSubscribed: yes
Mailing-List: contact gcc-patches-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Id: <gcc-patches.gcc.gnu.org>
List-Archive: <http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/>
List-Post: <mailto:gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gcc-patches-help@gcc.gnu.org>
Sender: gcc-patches-owner@gcc.gnu.org
X-SW-Source: 2012-12/txt/msg00392.txt.bz2

>> Yes, the approach taken in this patch looks really good to me. There
>> should be no code differences with your patch, but let's ask HJ for
>> his opinion on intrinsics header changes.
>
> Hi Kirill,
>
> Can you take  a look?  Thanks.

Hi guys, I like changes in intrinsics header.

Thanks, K