On April 14, 2021 5:10:26 PM GMT+02:00, Richard Sandiford via Gcc-patches
<gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org> wrote:
>Looking at PR99929 showed that we weren't dumping enough information
>about variable-length CONST_VECTORs. Something like:
>
> (const_vector:VNx4SI [(const_int 1) (const_int 0)])
>
>could be either:
>
>(a) 1, 0, 1, 0, repeating
>(b) 1 followed by all zeros
>
>This patch adds more information to the dumps. There are four cases:
>
>(a) above:
>
> (const_vector:VNx4SI repeat [
> (const_int 1)
> (const_int 0)
> ])
>
>(b) above:
>
> (const_vector:VNx4SI [
> (const_int 1)
> repeat [
> (const_int 0)
> ]
> ])
>
>a single stepped sequence:
>
> (const_vector:VNx4SI [
> (const_int 0)
> stepped [
> (const_int 1)
> (const_int 2)
> ]
> ])
>
>interleaved stepped sequences:
>
> (const_vector:VNx4SI [
> (const_int 0)
> (const_int 40)
> stepped (interleave 2) [
> (const_int 1)
> (const_int 41)
> (const_int 2)
> (const_int 42)
> ]
> ])
>
>There are probably better syntaxes, but hopefully this is at least
>an improvement on the status quo.
>
>Tested on aarch64-linux-gnu, arm-linux-gnueabihf, armeb-eabi
>and x86_64-linux-gnu. OK to install now, or should it wait
>until GCC 12? (It only affects SVE in practice.)
Ok now (it should be harmless, no?)
Thanks,
Richard.
>Richard
>
>
>gcc/
> * print-rtl.c (rtx_writer::print_rtx_operand_codes_E_and_V): Print
> more information about variable-length CONST_VECTORs.
>---
> gcc/print-rtl.c | 32 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-
> 1 file changed, 31 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
>diff --git a/gcc/print-rtl.c b/gcc/print-rtl.c
>index c7982bce507..081fc50fab8 100644
>--- a/gcc/print-rtl.c
>+++ b/gcc/print-rtl.c
>@@ -370,6 +370,10 @@ rtx_writer::print_rtx_operand_codes_E_and_V
>(const_rtx in_rtx, int idx)
> print_rtx_head, m_indent * 2, "");
> m_sawclose = 0;
> }
>+ if (GET_CODE (in_rtx) == CONST_VECTOR
>+ && !GET_MODE_NUNITS (GET_MODE (in_rtx)).is_constant ()
>+ && CONST_VECTOR_DUPLICATE_P (in_rtx))
>+ fprintf (m_outfile, " repeat");
> fputs (" [", m_outfile);
> if (XVEC (in_rtx, idx) != NULL)
> {
>@@ -377,12 +381,32 @@ rtx_writer::print_rtx_operand_codes_E_and_V
>(const_rtx in_rtx, int idx)
> if (XVECLEN (in_rtx, idx))
> m_sawclose = 1;
>
>+ int barrier = XVECLEN (in_rtx, idx);
>+ if (GET_CODE (in_rtx) == CONST_VECTOR
>+ && !GET_MODE_NUNITS (GET_MODE (in_rtx)).is_constant ())
>+ barrier = CONST_VECTOR_NPATTERNS (in_rtx);
>+
> for (int j = 0; j < XVECLEN (in_rtx, idx); j++)
> {
> int j1;
>
>+ if (j == barrier)
>+ {
>+ fprintf (m_outfile, "\n%s%*s",
>+ print_rtx_head, m_indent * 2, "");
>+ if (!CONST_VECTOR_STEPPED_P (in_rtx))
>+ fprintf (m_outfile, "repeat [");
>+ else if (CONST_VECTOR_NPATTERNS (in_rtx) == 1)
>+ fprintf (m_outfile, "stepped [");
>+ else
>+ fprintf (m_outfile, "stepped (interleave %d) [",
>+ CONST_VECTOR_NPATTERNS (in_rtx));
>+ m_indent += 2;
>+ }
>+
> print_rtx (XVECEXP (in_rtx, idx, j));
>- for (j1 = j + 1; j1 < XVECLEN (in_rtx, idx); j1++)
>+ int limit = MIN (barrier, XVECLEN (in_rtx, idx));
>+ for (j1 = j + 1; j1 < limit; j1++)
> if (XVECEXP (in_rtx, idx, j) != XVECEXP (in_rtx, idx, j1))
> break;
>
>@@ -393,6 +417,12 @@ rtx_writer::print_rtx_operand_codes_E_and_V
>(const_rtx in_rtx, int idx)
> }
> }
>
>+ if (barrier < XVECLEN (in_rtx, idx))
>+ {
>+ m_indent -= 2;
>+ fprintf (m_outfile, "\n%s%*s]", print_rtx_head, m_indent * 2, "");
>+ }
>+
> m_indent -= 2;
> }
> if (m_sawclose)
