From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <rguenther@suse.de>
Received: from smtp-out1.suse.de (smtp-out1.suse.de [195.135.220.28])
	by sourceware.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 0E1033858D39
	for <gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org>; Fri, 26 Aug 2022 09:25:54 +0000 (GMT)
DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.4.1 sourceware.org 0E1033858D39
Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=suse.de
Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=suse.de
Received: from relay2.suse.de (relay2.suse.de [149.44.160.134])
	by smtp-out1.suse.de (Postfix) with ESMTP id CB7DF337E6;
	Fri, 26 Aug 2022 09:25:52 +0000 (UTC)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=suse.de; s=susede2_rsa;
	t=1661505952; h=from:from:reply-to:date:date:message-id:message-id:to:to:cc:cc:
	 mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type:
	 in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references;
	bh=l3Zcm5ptlLEJ8nd9NjKctZYbKAOYlJAHh5qxbXT4rgo=;
	b=tzfYNuPRaqt3Nb3hkLx1ru4WP9Q6JA5rlAgwtou3PDKcLt56x0FL6hlWn0WEYWR7EVCCld
	PawsWADRQ2i1cKO8N/byNgRN43bnxars2ncoofQqw7KIr915y9t5leudr28jgkTi6SAsGx
	OxQPUT7BR3UOmEczV087jMIp4oZlWlk=
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=ed25519-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=suse.de;
	s=susede2_ed25519; t=1661505952;
	h=from:from:reply-to:date:date:message-id:message-id:to:to:cc:cc:
	 mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type:
	 in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references;
	bh=l3Zcm5ptlLEJ8nd9NjKctZYbKAOYlJAHh5qxbXT4rgo=;
	b=JLhWaxEr5vp5q1xfDmn9E9fCWT3MYRtLpNnPJICEr2CXcS1lY/Wmoo1UbLkNrVjMEUDFe6
	kbCQV4VLxXxXbaDQ==
Received: from wotan.suse.de (wotan.suse.de [10.160.0.1])
	(using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits))
	(No client certificate requested)
	by relay2.suse.de (Postfix) with ESMTPS id A58CE2C141;
	Fri, 26 Aug 2022 09:25:52 +0000 (UTC)
Date: Fri, 26 Aug 2022 09:25:52 +0000 (UTC)
From: Richard Biener <rguenther@suse.de>
To: Richard Sandiford <richard.sandiford@arm.com>
cc: gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/6] Optimise placement of SLP permutations
In-Reply-To: <mptwnawiids.fsf@arm.com>
Message-ID: <nycvar.YFH.7.77.849.2208260925300.14286@jbgna.fhfr.qr>
References: <mptwnawiids.fsf@arm.com>
User-Agent: Alpine 2.22 (LSU 394 2020-01-19)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-5.0 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,DKIM_VALID_EF,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,TXREP,T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.6
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.6 (2021-04-09) on server2.sourceware.org
List-Id: <gcc-patches.gcc.gnu.org>

On Thu, 25 Aug 2022, Richard Sandiford wrote:

> This series is a follow-up from the RFC that I posted a while
> back about optimising the placement of SLP permutations.
> The main comment is in the final patch.
> 
> Tested on aarch64-linux-gnu and x86_64-linux-gnu.  If the series
> is OK, I'll test on powerpc64le-linux-gnu too before committing.

The series is OK.

Thanks for working on this!
Richard.