On Fri, Oct 30, 2020 at 4:07 PM Carl Love <c...@us.ibm.com> wrote: > > GCC maintainers: > > The following patch adds new builtins for the vector integer multiply, > divide and modulo operations. The builtins are: > vec_mulh(), vec_div(), vec_dive(), vec_mod() for signed and unsigned > integers and long long integers. Support for signed and unsigned long > long integers the exiting vec_mul() is added. Note that the existing > support for the vec_div()and vec_mul() builtins emulate the vector > operations with multiple scalar instructions. This patch adds support > for these builtins to use the new vector instructions. > > The patch was compiled and tested on: > > powerpc64le-unknown-linux-gnu (Power 9 LE) > > with no regressions. Additionally the new test case was compiled and > executed by hand on Mambo to verify the test case passes. > > Please let me know if this patch is acceptable for mainline. Thanks. > > Carl Love > > ------------------------------------------------------------- > > 2020-10-30 Carl Love <c...@us.ibm.com> > > gcc/ > * config/rs6000/altivec.h (vec_mulh, vec_div, vec_dive, vec_mod): New > defines. > * config/rs6000/altivec.md (VIlong): Move define to file vector.md. > * config/rs6000/rs6000-builtin.def (VDIVES_V4SI, VDIVES_V2DI, > VDIVEU_V4SI, VDIVEU_V2DI, VDIVS_V4SI, VDIVS_V2DI, VDIVU_V4SI, > VDIVU_V2DI, VMODS_V2DI, VMODS_V4SI, VMODU_V2DI, VMODU_V4SI, > VMULHS_V2DI, > VMULHS_V4SI, VMULHU_V2DI, VMULHU_V4SI, VMULLD_V2DI): Add builtin > define. > (VMUL, VMULH, VDIVE, VMOD): Add new BU_P10_OVERLOAD_2 definitions. > * config/rs6000/rs6000-call.c (VSX_BUILTIN_VEC_DIV, > P10_BUILTIN_VEC_VDIVE, > P10_BUILTIN_VEC_VMOD, P10_BUILTIN_VEC_VMULH): New overloaded > definitions. > (builtin_function_type) > [P10V_BUILTIN_VDIVEU_V4SI, P10V_BUILTIN_VDIVEU_V2DI, > P10V_BUILTIN_VDIVU_V4SI, P10V_BUILTIN_VDIVU_V2DI, > P10V_BUILTIN_VMODU_V2DI, P10V_BUILTIN_VMODU_V4SI, > P10V_BUILTIN_VMULHU_V2DI, > P10V_BUILTIN_VMULHU_V4SI, P10V_BUILTIN_VMULLD_V2DI]: Add case > statement > for builtins. > * config/rs6000/vector.md (UNSPEC_VDIVES, UNSPEC_VDIVEU, > UNSPEC_VMULHS, > UNSPEC_VMULHU, UNSPEC_VMULLD): Add enum for UNSPECs. > (VIlong_char): Add define_mod_attribute. > (vdives_<mode>, vdiveu_<mode>, vdiv<mode>3, uuvdiv<mode>3, > vdivs_<mode>, > vdivu_<mode>, vmods_<mode>, vmodu_<mode>, vmulhs_<mode>, > vmulhu_<mode>, > mulv2di3): Add define_insn, mode is VIlong. > config/rs6000/vsx.md (vsx_mul_v2di, vsx_udiv_v2di): Add if > (TARGET_POWER10) > statement. > * doc/extend.texi (vec_mulh, vec_mul, vec_div, vec_dive, vec_mod): Add > builtin descriptions.
> --- a/gcc/config/rs6000/vector.md > +++ b/gcc/config/rs6000/vector.md Hi, Carl I thought that vector.md was a transfer vector for the patterns and instructions were defined in vsx.md. Why are the new insn patterns defined in vector.md? > +(define_insn "div<mode>3" > + [(set (match_operand:VIlong 0 "vsx_register_operand" "=v") > + (div:VIlong (match_operand:VIlong 1 "vsx_register_operand" "v") > + (match_operand:VIlong 2 "vsx_register_operand" "v")))] > + "TARGET_POWER10" > + "vdivs<VIlong_char> %0,%1,%2" > + [(set_attr "type" "vecsimple")]) > + > +(define_insn "udiv<mode>3" > + [(set (match_operand:VIlong 0 "vsx_register_operand" "=v") > + (udiv:VIlong (match_operand:VIlong 1 "vsx_register_operand" "v") > + (match_operand:VIlong 2 "vsx_register_operand" "v")))] > + "TARGET_POWER10" > + "vdivu<VIlong_char> %0,%1,%2" > + [(set_attr "type" "vecsimple")]) > + > +(define_insn "vdivs_<mode>" > + [(set (match_operand:VIlong 0 "vsx_register_operand" "=v") > + (div:VIlong (match_operand:VIlong 1 "vsx_register_operand" "v") > + (match_operand:VIlong 2 "vsx_register_operand" "v")))] > + "TARGET_POWER10" > + "vdivs<VIlong_char> %0,%1,%2" > + [(set_attr "type" "vecsimple")]) > + > +(define_insn "vdivu_<mode>" > + [(set (match_operand:VIlong 0 "vsx_register_operand" "=v") > + (udiv:VIlong (match_operand:VIlong 1 "vsx_register_operand" "v") > + (match_operand:VIlong 2 "vsx_register_operand" "v")))] > + "TARGET_POWER10" > + "vdivu<VIlong_char> %0,%1,%2" > + [(set_attr "type" "vecsimple")]) Also, what is the reason to define div<mode>3 and udiv<mode>3, then repeat the patterns for vdivs_<mode> and vdivu_<mode>? Is there a difference between the two patterns that I'm missing? The new builtins should be able to invoke the new named standard patterns. Or we really want an additional set of patterns that match the builtin names? The div<mode>3 and udiv<mode>3 patterns do not seem to be listed in the ChangeLog. Thanks, David
