public inbox for gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "juzhe.zhong@rivai.ai" <juzhe.zhong@rivai.ai>
To: rguenther <rguenther@suse.de>,  "Robin Dapp" <rdapp.gcc@gmail.com>
Cc: gcc-patches <gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org>,
	 richard.sandiford <richard.sandiford@arm.com>
Subject: Re: Re: [PATCH] VECT: Support floating-point in-order reduction for length loop control
Date: Thu, 20 Jul 2023 15:26:38 +0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <EB41865018F0550E+202307201526371027137@rivai.ai> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <nycvar.YFH.7.77.849.2307200720590.12935@jbgna.fhfr.qr>

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 936 bytes --]

Hi, Richard.

I plan to change all LEN_MASK into MASK_LEN.

Start from LEN_MASK_GATHER_LOAD/LEN_MASK_SCATTER_STORE,
we notice keeping mask same order with original mask_* patterns 
will make codes cleaner and easier to maintain. 

Thanks


juzhe.zhong@rivai.ai
 
From: Richard Biener
Date: 2023-07-20 15:21
To: Robin Dapp
CC: juzhe.zhong; gcc-patches; richard.sandiford
Subject: Re: [PATCH] VECT: Support floating-point in-order reduction for length loop control
On Thu, 20 Jul 2023, Robin Dapp wrote:
 
> Hi Juzhe,
> 
> I just noticed that we recently started calling things MASK_LEN
> (instead of LEN_MASK before) with the reductions.  Wouldn't we want
> to be consistent here?  Especially as the length takes precedence.
> I realize the preparational work like optabs is already upstream
> but still wanted to bring it up.
 
Didn't notice that but yes, consistency would be nice to have.
 
Richard.
 

  reply	other threads:[~2023-07-20  7:26 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2023-07-20  6:07 juzhe.zhong
2023-07-20  6:22 ` Robin Dapp
2023-07-20  6:33   ` juzhe.zhong
2023-07-20  7:21   ` Richard Biener
2023-07-20  7:26     ` juzhe.zhong [this message]
2023-07-21 10:08     ` juzhe.zhong

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=EB41865018F0550E+202307201526371027137@rivai.ai \
    --to=juzhe.zhong@rivai.ai \
    --cc=gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org \
    --cc=rdapp.gcc@gmail.com \
    --cc=rguenther@suse.de \
    --cc=richard.sandiford@arm.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).