PATCH: PR rtl-optimization/48575: RTL vector patterns are limited to 26 elements

["H.J. Lu" <hjl dot tools at gmail dot com>]

On Mon, Apr 4, 2011 at 6:05 PM, H.J. Lu <hjl.tools@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 31, 2011 at 5:05 AM, Kenneth Zadeck
> <zadeck@naturalbridge.com> wrote:
>> we hit this limit trying to write the explicit semantics for a
>> vec_interleave_evenv32qi.
>>
>> ;;(define_insn "vec_interleave_evenv32qi"
>> ;; ?[(set (match_operand:V32QI 0 "register_operand" "=r")
>> ;; ? ?(vec_select:V32QI
>> ;; ? ? ?(vec_concat:V64QI
>> ;; ? ? ? ?(match_operand:V32QI 1 "register_operand" "0")
>> ;; ? ? ? ?(match_operand:V32QI 2 "register_operand" "r"))
>> ;; ? ? ?(parallel [(const_int ?0) (const_int 32)
>> ;; ? ? ? ? ? ? (const_int ?2) (const_int 34)
>> ;; ? ? ? ? ? ? (const_int ?4) (const_int 36)
>> ;; ? ? ? ? ? ? (const_int ?6) (const_int 38)
>> ;; ? ? ? ? ? ? (const_int ?8) (const_int 40)
>> ;; ? ? ? ? ? ? (const_int 10) (const_int 42)
>> ;; ? ? ? ? ? ? (const_int 12) (const_int 44)
>> ;; ? ? ? ? ? ? (const_int 14) (const_int 46)
>> ;; ? ? ? ? ? ? (const_int 16) (const_int 48)
>> ;; ? ? ? ? ? ? (const_int 18) (const_int 50)
>> ;; ? ? ? ? ? ? (const_int 20) (const_int 52)
>> ;; ? ? ? ? ? ? (const_int 22) (const_int 54)
>> ;; ? ? ? ? ? ? (const_int 24) (const_int 56)
>> ;; ? ? ? ? ? ? (const_int 26) (const_int 58)
>> ;; ? ? ? ? ? ? (const_int 28) (const_int 60)
>> ;; ? ? ? ? ? ? (const_int 30) (const_int 62)])))]
>> ;; ?""
>> ;; ?"rimihv\t%0,%2,8,15,8"
>> ;; ?[(set_attr "type" "rimi")])
>>
>>
>> kenny
>>
>> On 03/31/2011 06:16 AM, Mike Stump wrote:
>>>
>>> On Mar 31, 2011, at 1:41 AM, Richard Guenther wrote:
>>>>
>>>> On Wed, Mar 30, 2011 at 8:09 PM, H.J. Lu<hongjiu.lu@intel.com> ?wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> On Wed, Mar 30, 2011 at 08:02:38AM -0700, H.J. Lu wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Currently, we limit XVECEXP to 26 elements in machine description
>>>>>> since we use letters 'a' to 'z' to encode them. ?I don't see any
>>>>>> reason why we can't go beyond 'z'. ?This patch removes this
>>>>>> restriction.
>>>>>> Any comments?
>>>>>>
>>>>> That was wrong. ?The problem is in vector elements. ?This patch passes
>>>>> bootstrap. ?Any comments?
>>>>
>>>> Do you really need it?
>>>
>>> I'm trying to recall if this is the limit Kenny and I hit.... ?If so,
>>> annoying. ?Kenny could confirm if it was. ?gcc's general strategy of, no
>>> fixed N gives gcc a certain flexibility that is very nice to have, on those
>>> general grounds, I kinda liked this patch.
>>
>
> Is my patch OK to install?
>

Here is my patch:

http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2011-03/msg02105.html

OK for trunk?

Thanks.


-- 
H.J.