------- Comment #12 from mikael at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-06-05 09:31 ------- (In reply to comment #9) > I have thought a little bit about this, and the problem is > a bit daunting ;-) Of course, this is at least partly because > my experience with the scalarizer is close to non-existant, but you > have to learn sometime. > > It seems that the functions for scalarizing do not help a lot > here, because (for example) we need three nested loops for implementing > the case where a and b are of rank 2. > > The preferred way would therefore be to state the rank 2 * rank 2 problem as > > do i=1,m > do j=1,n > c(i,j) = sum(a(i,:) * b(:,j)) > end do > end do > > with the inner dot product borrowed using the scalarizer (borrowing > from dot_product), and the outer loops using either hand-crafted > TREE code or calling the DO translation. > > Comments? Is this reasonable? >
The downside is that you can't use directly the matmul result in an expression. You will need a temporary. I'm working on nested scalarization loops for the sum intrinsic (pr43829) ; inlining matmul should be straightforward after that. -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=37131
