This is the mail archive of the mailing list for the GCC project.

Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
Other format: [Raw text]

Re: [i386] Replace builtins with vector extensions

On Thu, Oct 9, 2014 at 7:46 PM, Marc Glisse <> wrote:

>>> If this is accepted, I will gladly prepare patches removing the unused
>>> builtins and extending this to a few more operations (integer vectors in
>>> particular). If this is not the direction we want to go, I'd like to hear it
>>> clearly so I can move on...
>> As we discussed offlist, removing all the builtins would be problematic
>> for
>> Ada as they are the only medium allowing flexible access to vector
>> instructions
>> (aside autovectorization) for users.
>> Today, the model is very simple: people who want to build on top of vector
>> operations just bind to the builtins they need and expose higher level
>> interfaces if they like, provided proper type definitions (see
>> for
>> example).
> It is sad that this prevents us from removing the builtins, but I agree that
> we can't just drop ada+sse users like that. Well, less work for me if I
> don't have to remove the builtins, and my main motivation is optimization,
> even if I tried to sell the clean up to convince people.
> Uros, is it still ok if I change the intrinsics without removing the
> builtins? (with testcases for HJ and not before Kirill says it is ok)

Given that this will be a substantial work and considering the request
from Kirill, what do you think about separate development branch until
AVXn stuff is finished? This will give a couple of weeks and a
playground to finalize the approach for the conversion. Maybe even ada
can be tested there to not regress with the compatibility stuff.


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]