On Sat, Jan 04, 2014 at 09:46:32AM +0100, Uros Bizjak wrote:
> Taking into account Kirill's comment, the patch is OK, although I find
Thanks.
> a bit strange in [1] that
>
> void f2 (int *__restrict e, int *__restrict f) { int i; for (i = 0; i
> < 1024; i++) e[i] = f[i]; }
>
> results in
>
> vmovdqu64 (%rsi,%rax), %zmm0
> vmovdqu32 %zmm0, (%rdi,%rax)
>
> Shouldn't these two move insns be the same?
Right now *mov<mode>_internal doesn't care which of the vmovdqa{32,64}
(and vmovdqu{32,64}) it uses, we could do something like following.
We still have a problem that there is no vmovdq[ua]{8,16}, so we need to
pick one of {32,64} for it. Also, there is
case MODE_OI:
case MODE_TI:
return "vmovdqa64\t{%g1, %g0|%g0, %g1}";
a few lines above, if we wanted to make the output look "nicer", we could
also use vmovdqa64 there only for V{2,4}DImode and use vmovdqa32 for other
modes.
Note I haven't tested the patch at all, perhaps some testcases wouldn't
match their regexps anymore (but probably the
gcc.target/i386/avx512f-vmovdqu32-1.c change could go away).
--- gcc/config/i386/sse.md.jj 2014-01-04 09:48:48.000000000 +0100
+++ gcc/config/i386/sse.md 2014-01-04 10:03:30.256458372 +0100
@@ -743,9 +743,16 @@ (define_insn "*mov<mode>_internal"
case MODE_XI:
if (misaligned_operand (operands[0], <MODE>mode)
|| misaligned_operand (operands[1], <MODE>mode))
- return "vmovdqu64\t{%1, %0|%0, %1}";
- else
+ {
+ if (<MODE>mode == V8DImode)
+ return "vmovdqu64\t{%1, %0|%0, %1}";
+ else
+ return "vmovdqu32\t{%1, %0|%0, %1}";
+ }
+ else if (<MODE>mode == V8DImode)
return "vmovdqa64\t{%1, %0|%0, %1}";
+ else
+ return "vmovdqa32\t{%1, %0|%0, %1}";
default:
gcc_unreachable ();
>
> [1] http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc/2014-01/msg00015.html
>
> Thanks,
> Uros.
Jakub
