> -----Original Message-----
> From: Prathamesh Kulkarni <prathamesh.kulka...@linaro.org>
> Sent: 29 July 2021 15:45
> To: Kyrylo Tkachov <kyrylo.tkac...@arm.com>
> Cc: gcc Patches <gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org>; Richard Earnshaw
> <richard.earns...@foss.arm.com>
> Subject: Re: [ARM] PR66791: Replace builtins in vld1
>
> On Thu, 29 Jul 2021 at 14:57, Kyrylo Tkachov <kyrylo.tkac...@arm.com>
> wrote:
> >
> > Hi Prathamesh,
> >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: Prathamesh Kulkarni <prathamesh.kulka...@linaro.org>
> > > Sent: 26 July 2021 22:24
> > > To: gcc Patches <gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org>; Kyrylo Tkachov
> > > <kyrylo.tkac...@arm.com>; Richard Earnshaw
> > > <richard.earns...@foss.arm.com>
> > > Subject: [ARM] PR66791: Replace builtins in vld1
> > >
> > > Hi,
> > > Similar to aarch64, this patch replaces call to builtin by
> > > dereferencing __a in vld1_p64, vld1_s64 and vld1_u64.
> > >
> > > The patch changes code-gen for the intrinsic as follows:
> > > Before patch:
> > > vld1.64 {d16}, [r0:64]
> > > vmov r0, r1, d16 @ int
> > > bx lr
> > >
> > > After patch:
> > > ldrd r0, [r0]
> > > bx lr
> > >
> > > I assume the code-gen after patch is correct, since it loads two
> > > consecutive words from [r0] into r0 and r1 ?
> >
> > Yes, this looks correct.
> >
> > >
> > > Bootstrapped+tested on arm-linux-gnueabihf.
> > > OK to commit ?
> >
> > Ok. Can we now remove the vld1 builtin definition?
> Does the attached patch look OK ?
> I suppose we can only remove entry for di since the patch replaces
> calls to only __builtin_neon_vld1di ?
Yeah, we can just remove the DI entry.
Ok if this passes the usual testing.
Thanks,
Kyrill
>
> Thanks,
> Prathamesh
> > Thanks,
> > Kyrill
> >
> > >
> > > Thanks,
> > > Prathamesh
