I see, thanks a lot.
Pan
-Original Message-
From: Jeff Law
Sent: Monday, July 7, 2025 10:38 AM
To: Li, Pan2 ; Robin Dapp ;
gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
Cc: juzhe.zh...@rivai.ai; kito.ch...@gmail.com; Chen, Ken ;
Liu, Hongtao
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 3/4] RISC-V: Implement unsigned scalar
On 7/4/25 10:54 PM, Li, Pan2 wrote:
What you do want to watch out for is constants
Here I want the max value of unsigned scalar based on mode, it could be
UINT8_MAX,
UINT16_MAX, UINT32_MAX and UINT64_MAX.
Understood, but within the compiler HOST_WIDE_INT is how we tend to want
to work on
aw
Sent: Saturday, July 5, 2025 9:46 AM
To: Robin Dapp ; Li, Pan2 ;
gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
Cc: juzhe.zh...@rivai.ai; kito.ch...@gmail.com; Chen, Ken ;
Liu, Hongtao
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 3/4] RISC-V: Implement unsigned scalar SAT_MUL from
uint128_t
On 7/4/25 1:18 PM, Robin Dapp wrote:
> T
On 7/4/25 1:18 PM, Robin Dapp wrote:
This generally looks OK to me (including the tests).
+ HOST_WIDE_INT max = ((uint64_t)1 << bitsize) - 1;
Wouldn't a uint64_t type for max be clearer? I guess the worst that can
happen is compiling on a 32-bit host for a 64-bit target and get bitsize
This generally looks OK to me (including the tests).
+ HOST_WIDE_INT max = ((uint64_t)1 << bitsize) - 1;
Wouldn't a uint64_t type for max be clearer? I guess the worst that can happen
is compiling on a 32-bit host for a 64-bit target and get bitsize == 32 here.
Do we even support this? If
From: Pan Li
This patch would like to implement the SAT_MUL scalar unsigned from
uint128_t, aka:
NT __attribute__((noinline))
sat_u_mul_##NT##_fmt_1 (NT a, NT b)
{
uint128_t x = (uint128_t)a * (uint128_t)b;
NT max = -1;
if (x > (uint128_t)(max))
return max;
else
