This is the mail archive of the
gcc@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: vcond implementation in altivec
- From: "Devang Patel" <devang dot patel at gmail dot com>
- To: "Ira Rosen" <IRAR at il dot ibm dot com>
- Cc: gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org, "Sa Liu" <SALIU at de dot ibm dot com>
- Date: Tue, 27 Feb 2007 08:49:17 -0800
- Subject: Re: vcond implementation in altivec
- Dkim-signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=beta; h=domainkey-signature:received:received:message-id:date:from:to:subject:cc:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references; b=OF9lGS2iANLzjNXdO+eo4taSHlZHaRaFMyOuKJ+X6wDQYtx3DL6LJmz+PdRogtLvODAmf3tII6hjWaS7nrHf1t0S9ikNrqKBlLidVs60npxh7ruKDKP4+QH14ipJg2+QxBohmYQQWRWaMM/7MnTE3IcCsmfblRKQjwRK3Cu4sww=
- References: <OFD5CD4AE9.BA1C9DC9-ONC225728F.002AE335-C225728F.002C39A6@il.ibm.com>
Is there a reason why op0 is V4SF
It is destination so, yes this is wrong.
and op1 is V4SI (and not V8HI)?
condition should be v4si, but it is not op1. So this is also not correct.
And also, why not use if_then_else instead of unspec (in all vcond's)?
I did not try that path. May be I did not know about it at that time.
-
Devang