On Tue, Apr 26, 2011 at 3:32 PM, H.J. Lu <hjl.to...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Mon, Apr 4, 2011 at 6:05 PM, H.J. Lu <hjl.to...@gmail.com> wrote: >> On Thu, Mar 31, 2011 at 5:05 AM, Kenneth Zadeck >> <zad...@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...@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? >
Hi, No one is listed to review genrecog.c. Could global reviewers comment on my patch? Thanks. -- H.J.
