On 31 October 2011 13:23, Jakub Jelinek <ja...@redhat.com> wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 31, 2011 at 01:14:25PM +0200, Ira Rosen wrote:
>> > --- gcc/tree-vect-stmts.c.jj 2011-10-28 16:21:06.000000000 +0200
>> > +++ gcc/tree-vect-stmts.c 2011-10-31 10:27:57.000000000 +0100
>> > @@ -2446,7 +2446,10 @@ vectorizable_shift (gimple stmt, gimple_
>> > optab = optab_for_tree_code (code, vectype, optab_vector);
>> > if (vect_print_dump_info (REPORT_DETAILS))
>> > fprintf (vect_dump, "vector/vector shift/rotate found.");
>> > - if (TYPE_MODE (op1_vectype) != TYPE_MODE (vectype))
>> > + if (!op1_vectype)
>> > + op1_vectype = get_same_sized_vectype (TREE_TYPE (op1),
>> > vectype_out);
>> > + if (op1_vectype == NULL_TREE
>> > + || TYPE_MODE (op1_vectype) != TYPE_MODE (vectype))
>> > {
>> > if (vect_print_dump_info (REPORT_DETAILS))
>> > fprintf (vect_dump, "unusable type for last operand in"
>> > @@ -2480,9 +2483,28 @@ vectorizable_shift (gimple stmt, gimple_
>> > /* Unlike the other binary operators, shifts/rotates have
>> > the rhs being int, instead of the same type as the lhs,
>> > so make sure the scalar is the right type if we are
>> > - dealing with vectors of short/char. */
>> > + dealing with vectors of long long/long/short/char. */
>> > if (dt[1] == vect_constant_def)
>> > op1 = fold_convert (TREE_TYPE (vectype), op1);
>> > + else if (!useless_type_conversion_p (TREE_TYPE (vectype),
>> > + TREE_TYPE (op1)))
>>
>> What happens in case dt[1] == vect_internal_def?
>
> For !slp_node we can't reach this with dt1[1] == vect_internal_def,
> because of:
> if (dt[1] == vect_internal_def && !slp_node)
> scalar_shift_arg = false;
> And for slp_node I'm just giving up if type modes don't match:
>
>> > + {
>> > + if (slp_node
>> > + && TYPE_MODE (TREE_TYPE (vectype))
>> > + != TYPE_MODE (TREE_TYPE (op1)))
>> > + {
>> > + if (vect_print_dump_info (REPORT_DETAILS))
>> > + fprintf (vect_dump, "unusable type for last operand
>> > in"
>> > + " vector/vector shift/rotate.");
>> > + return false;
>> > + }
>
Ah, OK.
> BTW, even the pre-existing if (dt[1] == vect_constant_def) doesn't seem to
> be 100% correct for slp_node != NULL, I think vect_get_constant_vectors
> will in that case create a VECTOR_CST with the desirable vector type
> (same type mode as op0's vector type mode), but the constants in the
> VECTOR_CST will have a wrong type (say V4DImode VECTOR_CST with
> SImode constants in its constructor). The expander doesn't ICE on it
> though.
Right. As you wrote before, we should probably change shift vectors
creation for SLP.
The patch is OK.
Thanks,
Ira
>
> Jakub
>
