> Right now it looks like plus/minus don't need to be different tests
> (and mult won't need to be either I presume)? While I'm not against adding
> individual tests for now I'd prefer us to consolidate them where possible in
> the long term. Is that in your plans?
I think we need the run tests for each op combine up to a point. But for asm
check,
Seems we can put it together? I mean something like below:
+/* { dg-do compile } */
+/* { dg-options "-march=rv64gcv -mabi=lp64d --param=gpr2vr-cost=0" } */
+
+#include "vx_binary.h"
+
+DEF_VX_BINARY_CASE_0(int32_t, +)
+DEF_VX_BINARY_CASE_0(int32_t, -)
+
+/* { dg-final { scan-assembler-times {vadd.vx} 1 } } */
+/* { dg-final { scan-assembler-times {vsub.vx} 1 } } */
If that is ok, I will start with this series.
Pan
-----Original Message-----
From: Robin Dapp <rdapp....@gmail.com>
Sent: Monday, May 12, 2025 4:24 PM
To: Li, Pan2 <pan2...@intel.com>; gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
Cc: juzhe.zh...@rivai.ai; kito.ch...@gmail.com; jeffreya...@gmail.com;
rdapp....@gmail.com; Chen, Ken <ken.c...@intel.com>; Liu, Hongtao
<hongtao....@intel.com>; Robin Dapp <rdapp....@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v1 0/7] RISC-V: Combine vec_duplicate + vsub.vv to vsub.vx
on GR2VR cost
> This patch would like to introduce the combine of vec_dup + vsub.vv into
> vsub.vx on the cost value of GR2VR. The late-combine will take place if
> the cost of GR2VR is zero, or reject the combine if non-zero like 1, 15
> in test. There will be two cases for the combine:
The changes to add are very mechanical so I'd think they're OK (once the CI is
happy). Right now it looks like plus/minus don't need to be different tests
(and mult won't need to be either I presume)? While I'm not against adding
individual tests for now I'd prefer us to consolidate them where possible in
the long term. Is that in your plans?
--
Regards
Robin
