On 1 February 2011 16:23, Ulrich Weigand wrote:
>>
>> Are they actually broken ? I'd be worried if that were the case. My
>> understanding is that the
>> existing ones are being used for the Neon intrinsics / builtins.
>
> Yes, they're broken, for the reason Ira originally points out:
Right. Th
Ramana Radhakrishnan wrote:
> On 1 February 2011 14:01, Ulrich Weigand
wrote:
> > - You define new patterns neon_vzip_interleave etc. instead of
using
> > the existing neon_vzip_internal etc., presumably because the
> > existing patterns are broken. But because they are actually broken,
> > t
On 1 February 2011 14:01, Ulrich Weigand wrote:
> Ira Rosen wrote:
>
>> After testing only with the vectorizer testsuite (which contains at
>> least 30 tests for strided accesses), I'd appreciate comments on the
>> patch before I start full testing (cross testing with qemu doesn't
>> work so well
Ira Rosen wrote:
> After testing only with the vectorizer testsuite (which contains at
> least 30 tests for strided accesses), I'd appreciate comments on the
> patch before I start full testing (cross testing with qemu doesn't
> work so well for NEON).
I cannot really comment on the ARM semantic
On 1 February 2011 11:47, Ira Rosen wrote:
> Thanks a lot! It seems to work. It fixed the problem and I am now
> testing the patch on the rest of the vectorizer testsuite.
After testing only with the vectorizer testsuite (which contains at
least 30 tests for strided accesses), I'd appreciate com
On 31 January 2011 16:53, Ulrich Weigand wrote:
> Ira Rosen wrote:
>
>> (define_insn "neon_vzip_internal"
>> [(set (match_operand:VDQW 0 "s_register_operand" "=w")
>> (unspec:VDQW [(match_operand:VDQW 1 "s_register_operand" "0")]
>> UNSPEC_VZIP1))
>> (set (match_op
Ira Rosen wrote:
> (define_insn "neon_vzip_internal"
> [(set (match_operand:VDQW 0 "s_register_operand" "=w")
>(unspec:VDQW [(match_operand:VDQW 1 "s_register_operand" "0")]
> UNSPEC_VZIP1))
>(set (match_operand:VDQW 2 "s_register_operand" "=w")
> (unspec
On Mon, 2011-01-31 at 16:02 +0200, Ira Rosen wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I am trying to implement interleave_high/low and extract_even/odd
> using vzip and vuzp instructions. I am attaching a patch that attempts
> to do that. It uses already existing neon_vzip_internal. The
> problem with it is that it does
