From: Richard Sandiford <richard.sandiford@arm.com>
To: Robin Dapp <rdapp.gcc@gmail.com>
Cc: "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>
Subject: Re: [PATCH V3] RISC-V: Fix bug of pre-calculated const vector mask for VNx1BI, VNx2BI and VNx4BI
Date: Thu, 29 Jun 2023 09:54:11 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <mptilb67ioc.fsf@arm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <85bfdc0a-6b55-a72c-b8d8-656b40b0003a@gmail.com> (Robin Dapp's message of "Thu, 29 Jun 2023 10:14:08 +0200")
Robin Dapp <rdapp.gcc@gmail.com> writes:
>> Sorry, only realised later, but: if the precision can cover fewer
>> bytes than the bitsize, I suppose there ought to be some zero-byte
>> padding at the end as well.
> It looks like this problem, and also the padding, has been discussed
> before when the precision of VNx1BI etc. was first adjusted in the
> RISC-V backend?
Very probably. Can't remember now.
> I didn't immediately get the padding, though. So if we e.g. have a
> VNx2BI constant {0, 1} what would we pad the resulting value "2" to?
> A full byte?
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.
I vaguely remembered that that could happen for RVV_FIXED_VLMAX,
but perhaps I misremember. If it can't happen then an assert
would be OK instead.
Thanks,
Richard
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2023-06-29 8:54 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 [this message]
2023-06-29 9:09 ` Robin Dapp
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=mptilb67ioc.fsf@arm.com \
--to=richard.sandiford@arm.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=rdapp.gcc@gmail.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).