‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Original Message ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ On Friday, December 6, 2019 12:43 PM, Richard Biener richard.guent...@gmail.com wrote:
... ... > > Are we certain the change we want is to support _Complex double so that > > cexpi is auto-vectorized? > > Looking at the resulting executable of the code with sincos in the > > loop, the only function called > > is sincos. Not builtin_cexpi or any variant of cexpi. File > > gcc/builtins.c expands calls to builtin_cexpi > > to sincos! What is gained by the compiler going through the > > transformations sincos -> builtin_cexpi -> > > sincos? > > Yes, we want to support vectorizing cexpi because that is what the compiler > will lower sincos to. The sincos API is painful to deal with due to the data > dependences it introduces. Now, the vectorizer can of course emit calls to a > vectorized sincos it just needs to be able to deal with cexpi input IL. > > Richard. I'm modifying the code trying to get complex double accepted as a valid type by the vectorizer. This is the first time I'm dealing with GCC source so I ask for some patience. Function mode_for_vector in gcc/stor-layout.c requires a new else-if for complex double. I cannot seem to find a header file where MIN_MODE_VECTOR_FLOAT and similar macros are defined. I expect a new MIN_MODE_COMPLEX_VECTOR_FLOAT to be defined in the same file as the existing similar macros. How do I go about making this change? Thanks. Bert.
