Prathamesh Kulkarni via Gcc-patches <gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org> writes:
> Hi,
> The attached patch adjusts vec_perm_const hook to accommodate the new
> parameter.
> For rationale, please see:
> https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2022-May/595128.html
> OK to commit if bootstrap+test passes ?
>
> Thanks,
> Prathamesh
>
> diff --git a/gcc/config/arm/arm.cc b/gcc/config/arm/arm.cc
> index 2afe0445ed5..48759532ab3 100644
> --- a/gcc/config/arm/arm.cc
> +++ b/gcc/config/arm/arm.cc
> @@ -31813,9 +31813,12 @@ arm_expand_vec_perm_const_1 (struct
> expand_vec_perm_d *d)
> /* Implement TARGET_VECTORIZE_VEC_PERM_CONST. */
>
> static bool
> -arm_vectorize_vec_perm_const (machine_mode vmode, rtx target, rtx op0, rtx
> op1,
> - const vec_perm_indices &sel)
> +arm_vectorize_vec_perm_const (machine_mode vmode, machine_mode op_mode, rtx
> target,
Formatting nit: long line.
Patch is OK with the parameters reflowed, like you did for aarch64.
Same nit for some of the other patches (but some are OK as-is).
OK for 2-8 with that fixed.
Thanks,
Richard
> + rtx op0, rtx op1, const vec_perm_indices &sel)
> {
> + if (vmode != op_mode)
> + return false;
> +
> struct expand_vec_perm_d d;
> int i, nelt, which;
>
