From: Kito Cheng <kito.cheng@sifive.com>
To: Jeff Law <jeffreyalaw@gmail.com>
Cc: "Li, Pan2" <pan2.li@intel.com>,
"gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org" <gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org>,
"juzhe.zhong@rivai.ai" <juzhe.zhong@rivai.ai>,
"Wang, Yanzhang" <yanzhang.wang@intel.com>,
Andrew Waterman <andrew@sifive.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] RISC-V: Allow RVV VMS{Compare}(V1, V1) simplify to VMSET
Date: Sun, 30 Apr 2023 09:40:00 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <CALLt3ThTep2oX5JNueaZTZrJSki70Wkh0RGH0i1Ut_W0Yj=v8w@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <72057d65-d5d4-00fc-307a-709ab0a82822@gmail.com>
Hi Jeff:
The RTL pattern already models tail element and vector length well,
so I don't feel the first version of Pan's patch has any problem?
Input RTL pattern:
#(insn 10 7 12 2 (set (reg:VNx2BI 134 [ _1 ])
# (if_then_else:VNx2BI (unspec:VNx2BI [
# (const_vector:VNx2BI repeat [
# (const_int 1 [0x1])
# ]) # all-1 mask
# (reg:DI 143) # AVL reg, or vector length
# (const_int 2 [0x2]) # mask policy
# (const_int 0 [0]) # avl type
# (reg:SI 66 vl)
# (reg:SI 67 vtype)
# ] UNSPEC_VPREDICATE)
# (geu:VNx2BI (reg/v:VNx2QI 137 [ v1 ])
# (reg/v:VNx2QI 137 [ v1 ]))
# (unspec:VNx2BI [
# (reg:SI 0 zero)
# ] UNSPEC_VUNDEF))) # maskoff and tail operand
# (expr_list:REG_DEAD (reg:DI 143)
# (expr_list:REG_DEAD (reg/v:VNx2QI 137 [ v1 ])
# (nil))))
And the split pattern, only did on tail/maskoff element with undefined value:
(define_split
[(set (match_operand:VB 0 "register_operand")
(if_then_else:VB
(unspec:VB
[(match_operand:VB 1 "vector_all_trues_mask_operand")
(match_operand 4 "vector_length_operand")
(match_operand 5 "const_int_operand")
(match_operand 6 "const_int_operand")
(reg:SI VL_REGNUM)
(reg:SI VTYPE_REGNUM)] UNSPEC_VPREDICATE)
(match_operand:VB 3 "vector_move_operand")
(match_operand:VB 2 "vector_undef_operand")))] # maskoff
and tail operand, only match undef value
Then it turns into vmset, and also discard mask policy operand (since
maskoff is undef means don't care IMO):
(insn 10 7 12 2 (set (reg:VNx2BI 134 [ _1 ])
(if_then_else:VNx2BI (unspec:VNx2BI [
(const_vector:VNx2BI repeat [
(const_int 1 [0x1])
]) # all-1 mask
(reg:DI 143) # AVL reg, or vector length
(const_int 2 [0x2]) # mask policy
(reg:SI 66 vl)
(reg:SI 67 vtype)
] UNSPEC_VPREDICATE)
(const_vector:VNx2BI repeat [
(const_int 1 [0x1])
]) # all-1
(unspec:VNx2BI [
(reg:SI 0 zero)
] UNSPEC_VUNDEF))) # still vundef
(expr_list:REG_DEAD (reg:DI 143)
(nil)))
On Sat, Apr 29, 2023 at 11:05 PM Jeff Law <jeffreyalaw@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> On 4/28/23 20:55, Li, Pan2 wrote:
> > Thanks Jeff for comments.
> >
> > It makes sense to me. For the EQ operator we should have CONSTM1.
> That's not the way I interpret the RVV documentation. Of course it's
> not terribly clear. I guess one could do some experiments with qemu
> or try to dig into the sail code and figure out the intent from those.
>
>
>
> Does this mean s390 parts has similar issue here? Then for instructions
> like VMSEQ, we need to adjust the simplify_rtx up to a point.
> You'd have to refer to the s390 instruction set reference to understand
> precisely how the vector compares work.
>
> But as it stands this really isn't a simplify-rtx question, but a
> question of the semantics of risc-v. What happens with the high bits
> in the destination mask register is critical -- and if risc-v doesn't
> set them to all ones in this case, then that would mean that defining
> that macro is simply wrong for risc-v.
>
> jeff
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2023-04-30 1:40 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 21+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2023-04-28 15:21 pan2.li
2023-04-28 21:47 ` Jeff Law
2023-04-29 2:55 ` Li, Pan2
2023-04-29 13:35 ` Li, Pan2
2023-04-29 15:05 ` Jeff Law
2023-04-29 17:21 ` Andrew Waterman
2023-04-29 17:28 ` Palmer Dabbelt
2023-04-29 17:46 ` Jeff Law
2023-04-29 17:48 ` Palmer Dabbelt
2023-04-29 17:52 ` Jeff Law
2023-04-29 18:15 ` Palmer Dabbelt
2023-04-29 17:49 ` Jeff Law
2023-04-30 1:40 ` Kito Cheng [this message]
2023-04-30 14:21 ` Li, Pan2
2023-05-02 16:28 ` Jeff Law
2023-05-03 11:17 ` Li, Pan2
2023-05-05 12:30 ` Li, Pan2
2023-05-05 12:37 ` Kito Cheng
2023-05-05 12:45 ` Li, Pan2
2023-05-05 14:51 ` Kito Cheng
2023-04-29 13:32 ` [PATCH v2] " pan2.li
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='CALLt3ThTep2oX5JNueaZTZrJSki70Wkh0RGH0i1Ut_W0Yj=v8w@mail.gmail.com' \
--to=kito.cheng@sifive.com \
--cc=andrew@sifive.com \
--cc=gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org \
--cc=jeffreyalaw@gmail.com \
--cc=juzhe.zhong@rivai.ai \
--cc=pan2.li@intel.com \
--cc=yanzhang.wang@intel.com \
/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).