On 2022-12-01 15:10, Jiufu Guo via Gcc-patches wrote:
Hi Kewen,
在 12/1/22 2:11 PM, Kewen.Lin 写道:
on 2022/12/1 13:35, Jiufu Guo wrote:
Hi Kewen,
Thanks for your quick and insight review!
在 12/1/22 1:17 PM, Kewen.Lin 写道:
Hi Jeff,
on 2022/12/1 09:36, Jiufu Guo wrote:
Hi,
This patch just uses sext_hwi to replace the expression like:
((value & 0xf..f) ^ 0x80..0) - 0x80..0 for rs6000.cc and rs6000.md.
Bootstrap & regtest pass on ppc64{,le}.
Is this ok for trunk?
You didn't say it clearly but I guessed you have grepped in the
whole
config/rs6000 directory, right? I noticed there are still two
places
using this kind of expression in function
constant_generates_xxspltiw,
but I assumed it's intentional as their types are not HOST_WIDE_INT.
gcc/config/rs6000/rs6000.cc: short sign_h_word = ((h_word &
0xffff) ^ 0x8000) - 0x8000;
gcc/config/rs6000/rs6000.cc: int sign_word = ((word & 0xffffffff) ^
0x80000000) - 0x80000000;
If so, could you state it clearly in commit log like "with type
signed/unsigned HOST_WIDE_INT" or similar?
Good question!
And as you said sext_hwi is more for "signed/unsigned HOST_WIDE_INT".
For these two places, it seems sext_hwi is not needed actually!
And I did see why these expressions are used, may be just an
assignment
is ok.
ah, I see. I agree using the assignment is quite enough. Could you
please also simplify them together? Since they are with the form
"((value & 0xf..f) ^ 0x80..0) - 0x80..0" too, and can be refactored
in a better way. Thanks!
Sure, I believe just "short sign_h_word = vsx_const->half_words[0];"
should be correct :-), and included in the updated patch.
Updated patch is attached, bootstrap®test is on going.
Bootstrap and regtest pass on ppc64{,le}.
BR,
Jeff (Jiufu)
BR,
Jeff (Jiufu)
BR,
Kewen
