On Wed, 29 Dec 2021, Andre Vieira (lists) wrote:
> Hi Richard,
>
> Thank you for the review, I've adopted all above suggestions downstream, I am
> still surprised how many style things I still miss after years of gcc
> development :(
>
> On 17/12/2021 12:44, Richard Sandiford wrote:
> >
> >> @@ -3252,16 +3257,31 @@ vectorizable_call (vec_info *vinfo,
> >> rhs_type = unsigned_type_node;
> >> }
> >> - int mask_opno = -1;
> >> + /* The argument that is not of the same type as the others. */
> >> + int diff_opno = -1;
> >> + bool masked = false;
> >> if (internal_fn_p (cfn))
> >> - mask_opno = internal_fn_mask_index (as_internal_fn (cfn));
> >> + {
> >> + if (cfn == CFN_FTRUNC_INT)
> >> + /* For FTRUNC this represents the argument that carries the type of
> >> the
> >> + intermediate signed integer. */
> >> + diff_opno = 1;
> >> + else
> >> + {
> >> + /* For masked operations this represents the argument that carries
> >> the
> >> + mask. */
> >> + diff_opno = internal_fn_mask_index (as_internal_fn (cfn));
> >> + masked = diff_opno >= 0;
> >> + }
> >> + }
> > I think it would be cleaner not to process argument 1 at all for
> > CFN_FTRUNC_INT. There's no particular need to vectorise it.
>
> I agree with this, will change the loop to continue for argument 1 when
> dealing with non-masked CFN's.
>
> >> }
> >> […]
> >> diff --git a/gcc/tree.c b/gcc/tree.c
> >> index
> >> 845228a055b2cfac0c9ca8c0cda1b9df4b0095c6..f1e9a1eb48769cb11aa69730e2480ed5522f78c1
> >> 100644
> >> --- a/gcc/tree.c
> >> +++ b/gcc/tree.c
> >> @@ -6645,11 +6645,11 @@ valid_constant_size_p (const_tree size,
> >> cst_size_error *perr /* = NULL */)
> >> return true;
> >> }
> >>
> >> -/* Return the precision of the type, or for a complex or vector type the
> >> - precision of the type of its elements. */
> >> +/* Return the type, or for a complex or vector type the type of its
> >> + elements. */
> >> -unsigned int
> >> -element_precision (const_tree type)
> >> +tree
> >> +element_type (const_tree type)
> >> {
> >> if (!TYPE_P (type))
> >> type = TREE_TYPE (type);
> >> @@ -6657,7 +6657,16 @@ element_precision (const_tree type)
> >> if (code == COMPLEX_TYPE || code == VECTOR_TYPE)
> >> type = TREE_TYPE (type);
> >> - return TYPE_PRECISION (type);
> >> + return (tree) type;
> > I think we should stick a const_cast in element_precision and make
> > element_type take a plain “type”. As it stands element_type is an
> > implicit const_cast for many cases.
> >
> > Thanks,
> Was just curious about something here, I thought the purpose of having
> element_precision (before) and element_type (now) take a const_tree as an
> argument was to make it clear we aren't changing the input type. I understand
> that as it stands element_type could be an implicit const_cast (which I should
> be using rather than the '(tree)' cast), but that's only if 'type' is a type
> that isn't complex/vector, either way, we are conforming to the promise that
> we aren't changing the incoming type, what the caller then does with the
> result is up to them no?
>
> I don't mind making the changes, just trying to understand the reasoning
> behind it.
>
> I'll send in a new patch with all the changes after the review on the match.pd
> stuff.
I'm missing an updated patch after my initial review of the match.pd
stuff so not sure what to review. Can you re-post and updated patch?
Thanks,
Richard.
