This is the mail archive of the
gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: Ping: [PATCH] x86: don't use AVX512BW vmovdqu variants without -mavx512bw
- From: "Jan Beulich" <JBeulich at suse dot com>
- To: "Jan Hubicka" <hubicka at ucw dot cz>
- Cc: <gcc-patches at gcc dot gnu dot org>, "Kirill Yukhin" <kirill dot yukhin at gmail dot com>,<ubizjak at gmail dot com>
- Date: Tue, 02 Jan 2018 03:19:55 -0700
- Subject: Re: Ping: [PATCH] x86: don't use AVX512BW vmovdqu variants without -mavx512bw
- Authentication-results: sourceware.org; auth=none
- References: <5A3101F40200007800197102@prv-mh.provo.novell.com> <5A4B638A020000780019A1C6@prv-mh.provo.novell.com> <20180102100538.GA52901@kam.mff.cuni.cz>
>>> On 02.01.18 at 11:05, <hubicka@ucw.cz> wrote:
>> >>> On 13.12.17 at 10:33, wrote:
>> > Simply mirror the MODE_XI logic of handling unaligned operands in
>> > mov<mode>_internal into MODE_TI / MODE_OI handling.
>> >
>> > gcc/
>> > 2017-12-13 Jan Beulich <jbeulich@suse.com>
>> >
>> > * sse.md (mov<mode>_internal): Tighten condition for when to use
>> > vmovdqu<ssescalarsize> for TI and OI modes.
>> >
>> > gcc/testsuite/
>> > 2017-12-13 Jan Beulich <jbeulich@suse.com>
>> >
>> > * gcc.target/i386/avx512vl-no-vmovdqu8.c,
>> > gcc.target/i386/avx512vl-no-vmovdqu16.c: New.
>
> Looks OK. We do not need to update instruction attribute becuase we make no
> difference between those instructions and both ends up being ssemov?
I think so, yes, but my opinion here is certainly not meaning much.
Jan