From: Robin Dapp <rdapp.gcc@gmail.com>
To: "Robin Dapp via Gcc-patches" <gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org>,
钟居哲 <juzhe.zhong@rivai.ai>, "Jeff Law" <jeffreyalaw@gmail.com>,
"kito.cheng" <kito.cheng@gmail.com>,
"kito.cheng" <kito.cheng@sifive.com>, palmer <palmer@dabbelt.com>,
palmer <palmer@rivosinc.com>,
richard.sandiford@arm.com
Cc: rdapp.gcc@gmail.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH V3] RISC-V: Fix bug of pre-calculated const vector mask for VNx1BI, VNx2BI and VNx4BI
Date: Thu, 29 Jun 2023 11:09:17 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <f09db752-033f-b71e-15d3-0697a0ee964b@gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <mptilb67ioc.fsf@arm.com>
> Yeah, that part is OK, and was the case I was thinking about when
> I said OK yesterday. But now that we allow BITSIZE != PRECISION,
> it's possible for BITSIZE - PRECISION to be more than a full byte,
> in which case the new loop would not initialise every byte of
> the mode.
Ah, I see, so when e.g. BITSIZE == 16 and PRECISION == 1. Luckily
this cannot happen with RVV as all we do is adjust the precision
of the modes that have BITSIZE == 8. I'm going to add an assert.
Juzhe would rather work around that in the backend, though.
The other thing I just noticed is
tree
build_truth_vector_type_for_mode (poly_uint64 nunits, machine_mode mask_mode)
{
gcc_assert (mask_mode != BLKmode);
unsigned HOST_WIDE_INT esize;
if (VECTOR_MODE_P (mask_mode))
{
poly_uint64 vsize = GET_MODE_BITSIZE (mask_mode);
esize = vector_element_size (vsize, nunits);
}
else
esize = 1;
tree bool_type = build_nonstandard_boolean_type (esize);
return make_vector_type (bool_type, nunits, mask_mode);
}
which gives us wrong precision as we rely on the BITSIZE here as well.
This results in a precision of 1 for VNx8BI, 2 for VNx4BI and 4 for
VNx2BI.
Maybe this isn't a problem per se but to me it appears
just wrong.
Regards
Robin
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2023-06-29 9:09 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 21+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2023-06-28 9:47 Juzhe-Zhong
2023-06-28 18:11 ` Jeff Law
2023-06-28 19:02 ` 钟居哲
2023-06-28 19:12 ` Robin Dapp
2023-06-28 20:42 ` Richard Sandiford
2023-06-28 21:46 ` 钟居哲
2023-06-29 7:53 ` Richard Sandiford
2023-06-29 8:08 ` juzhe.zhong
2023-06-29 8:14 ` Robin Dapp
2023-06-29 8:18 ` juzhe.zhong
2023-06-29 8:53 ` Robin Dapp
2023-06-29 9:01 ` juzhe.zhong
2023-06-29 8:54 ` Richard Sandiford
2023-06-29 9:09 ` Robin Dapp [this message]
2023-06-29 9:23 ` juzhe.zhong
2023-06-29 11:22 ` Richard Biener
2023-06-29 11:38 ` Robin Dapp
2023-06-29 13:53 ` Kito Cheng
2023-06-29 14:04 ` Richard Sandiford
2023-06-29 14:12 ` Robin Dapp
2023-07-04 19:07 ` Robin Dapp
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=f09db752-033f-b71e-15d3-0697a0ee964b@gmail.com \
--to=rdapp.gcc@gmail.com \
--cc=gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org \
--cc=jeffreyalaw@gmail.com \
--cc=juzhe.zhong@rivai.ai \
--cc=kito.cheng@gmail.com \
--cc=kito.cheng@sifive.com \
--cc=palmer@dabbelt.com \
--cc=palmer@rivosinc.com \
--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).