On Tue, Dec 12, 2017 at 4:46 PM, Richard Sandiford <richard.sandif...@linaro.org> wrote: > Richard Biener <richard.guent...@gmail.com> writes: >> On Sun, Dec 10, 2017 at 12:20 AM, Richard Sandiford >> <richard.sandif...@linaro.org> wrote: >>> This patch changes vec_perm_indices from a plain vec<> to a class >>> that stores a canonicalised permutation, using the same encoding >>> as for VECTOR_CSTs. This means that vec_perm_indices now carries >>> information about the number of vectors being permuted (currently >>> always 1 or 2) and the number of elements in each input vector. >> >> Before I dive into the C++ details can you explain why it needs this >> info and how it encodes it for variable-length vectors? To interleave >> two vectors you need sth like { 0, N, 1, N+1, ... }, I'm not sure we >> can directly encode N here, can we? extract even/odd should just >> work as { 0, 2, 4, 6, ...} without knowledge of whether we permute >> one or two vectors (the one vector case just has two times the same >> vector) or how many elements each of the vectors (or the result) has. > > One of the later patches switches the element types to HOST_WIDE_INT, > so that we can represent all ssizetypes. Then there's a poly_int > patch (not yet posted) to make that poly_int64, so that we can > represent the N even for variable-length vectors. > > The class needs to know the number of elements because that affects > the canonical representation. E.g. extract even on fixed-length > vectors with both inputs the same should be { 0, 2, 4, ..., 0, 2, 4 ... }, > which we can't encode as a simple series. Interleave low with both > inputs the same should be { 0, 0, 1, 1, ... } for both fixed-length and > variable-length vectors.
Huh? extract even is { 0, 2, 4, 6, 8 ... } indexes in the selection vector are referencing concat'ed input vectors. So yes, for two same vectors that's effectively { 0, 2, 4, ..., 0, 2, 4, ... } but I don't see why that should be the canonical form? > Also, operator[] is supposed to return an in-range selector even if > the selector element is only implicitly encoded. So we need to know > the number of input elements there. > > Separating the number of input elements into the number of inputs > and the number of elements per input isn't really necessary, but made > it easier to provide routines for testing whether all selected > elements come from a particular input, and for rotating the selector > by a whole number of inputs. > > Thanks, > Richard