On Tue, 1 Oct 2024 09:53:02 GMT, Jatin Bhateja <jbhat...@openjdk.org> wrote:
>> Thanks for the example. Yes, you have a point there. So we would need to do: >> src1.rearrange(this.lanewise(VectorOperators.AND, 2 * VLENGTH - >> 1).toShuffle(), src2); > >> This could instead be: src1.rearrange(this.lanewise(VectorOperators.AND, 2 * >> VLENGTH - 1).toShuffle(), src2); Or even simplified to: >> src1.rearrange(this.toShuffle(), src2); > > Yes, this may save additional allocation penalty of result array allocation > which may slightly improve fall back performance, but logical operation > cannot be directly applied over floating point vectors. so, we will need an > explicit conversion to integral vector, which is why I opted for current > fallback implementation which is in line with rest of the code. I see the problem with float/double vectors. Let us do the rearrange form only for Integral (byte, short, int, long) vectors then. For float/double vector we could keep the code that you have currently. ------------- PR Review Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/20508#discussion_r1783278063
