[Bug target/52607] v4df __builtin_shuffle with {0,2,1,3} or {1,3,0,2}
jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org
Mon Mar 19 17:19:00 GMT 2012
- Previous message (by thread): [Bug target/52607] v4df __builtin_shuffle with {0,2,1,3} or {1,3,0,2}
- Next message (by thread): [Bug target/52607] v4df __builtin_shuffle with {0,2,1,3} or {1,3,0,2}
- Messages sorted by:
[ date ]
[ thread ]
[ subject ]
[ author ]
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52607
Jakub Jelinek <jakub at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
CC| |jakub at gcc dot gnu.org,
| |rth at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #8 from Jakub Jelinek <jakub at gcc dot gnu.org> 2012-03-19 17:13:53 UTC ---
I'm not very keen on having too many different routines, the more generic they
are, the better. So IMHO e.g. the two insn sequence, vperm2[if]128 + some one
insn shuffle could look like:
/* A subroutine of ix86_expand_vec_perm_builtin_1. Try to expand
a vector permutation using two instructions, vperm2f128 resp.
vperm2i128 followed by any single in-lane permutation. */
static bool
expand_vec_perm_vperm2f128 (struct expand_vec_perm_d *d)
{
struct expand_vec_perm_d dfirst, dsecond;
unsigned i, j, nelt = d->nelt, nelt2 = nelt / 2, perm;
bool ok;
if (!TARGET_AVX
|| GET_MODE_SIZE (d->vmode) != 32
|| (d->vmode != V8SFmode && d->vmode != V4DFmode && !TARGET_AVX2))
return false;
dsecond = *d;
if (d->op0 == d->op1)
dsecond.op1 = gen_reg_rtx (d->vmode);
dsecond.testing_p = true;
/* ((perm << 2)|perm) & 0x33 is the vperm2[fi]128
immediate. For perm < 16 the second permutation uses
d->op0 as first operand, for perm >= 16 it uses d->op1
as first operand. The second operand is the result of
vperm2[fi]128. */
for (perm = 0; perm < 32; perm++)
{
/* Ignore permutations which do not move anything cross-lane. */
if (perm < 16)
{
if ((perm & 0xc) == (1 << 2)) continue;
if ((perm & 3) == 0) continue;
if ((perm & 0xf) == ((3 << 2) | 2)) continue;
}
else
{
if ((perm & 0xc) == (3 << 2)) continue;
if ((perm & 3) == 2) continue;
if ((perm & 0xf) == (1 << 2)) continue;
}
for (i = 0; i < nelt; i++)
{
j = d->perm[i] / nelt2;
if (j == ((perm >> (2 * (i >= nelt2))) & 3))
dsecond.perm[i] = nelt + (i & nelt2) + (d->perm[i] & (nelt2 - 1));
else if (j == (unsigned) (i >= nelt2) + 2 * (perm >= 16))
dsecond.perm[i] = d->perm[i] & (nelt - 1);
else
break;
}
if (i == nelt)
{
start_sequence ();
ok = expand_vec_perm_1 (&dsecond);
end_sequence ();
}
else
ok = false;
if (ok)
{
if (d->testing_p)
return true;
dsecond.testing_p = false;
dfirst = *d;
if (d->op0 == d->op1)
dfirst.target = dsecond.op1;
else
dfirst.target = gen_reg_rtx (d->vmode);
for (i = 0; i < nelt; i++)
dfirst.perm[i] = (i & (nelt2 - 1))
+ ((perm >> (2 * (i >= nelt2))) & 3) * nelt2;
ok = expand_vec_perm_1 (&dfirst);
gcc_assert (ok);
dsecond.op1 = dfirst.target;
if (perm >= 16)
dsecond.op0 = dfirst.op1;
ok = expand_vec_perm_1 (&dsecond);
gcc_assert (ok);
return true;
}
/* For d->op0 == d->op1 the only useful vperm2f128 permutation
is 0x10. */
if (d->op0 == d->op1)
return false;
}
return false;
}
This will handle e.g. vperm2f128 + {vshufpd,vblendpd,vunpcklpd,vunpckhpd} etc.
But with the current expand_vselect implementation it might be too costly, at
least memory-wise.
- Previous message (by thread): [Bug target/52607] v4df __builtin_shuffle with {0,2,1,3} or {1,3,0,2}
- Next message (by thread): [Bug target/52607] v4df __builtin_shuffle with {0,2,1,3} or {1,3,0,2}
- Messages sorted by:
[ date ]
[ thread ]
[ subject ]
[ author ]
More information about the Gcc-bugs
mailing list