> I think you meant "the value extended into" rather than "the extended to". > OK with that fix.
Thanks Jeff, will commit the series with that fix. Pan -----Original Message----- From: Jeff Law <jeffreya...@gmail.com> Sent: Tuesday, January 28, 2025 11:18 PM To: Li, Pan2 <pan2...@intel.com>; gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org Cc: juzhe.zh...@rivai.ai; kito.ch...@gmail.com; rdapp....@gmail.com Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 1/4] RISC-V: Refactor SAT_* operand rtx extend to reg help func [NFC] On 1/27/25 4:07 AM, pan2...@intel.com wrote: > From: Pan Li <pan2...@intel.com> > > This patch would like to refactor the helper function of the SAT_* > scalar. The helper function will convert the define_pattern ops > to the xmode reg for the underlying code-gen. This patch add > new parameter for ZERO_EXTEND or SIGN_EXTEND if the input is const_int > or the mode is non-Xmode. > > The below test suites are passed for this patch. > * The rv64gcv fully regression test. > > gcc/ChangeLog: > > * config/riscv/riscv.cc (riscv_gen_zero_extend_rtx): Rename from ... > (riscv_extend_to_xmode_reg): Rename to and add rtx_code for > zero/sign extend if non-Xmode. > (riscv_expand_usadd): Leverage the renamed function with ZERO_EXTEND. > (riscv_expand_ussub): Ditto. > > Signed-off-by: Pan Li <pan2...@intel.com> > --- > gcc/config/riscv/riscv.cc | 77 ++++++++++++++++++++++++--------------- > 1 file changed, 48 insertions(+), 29 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/gcc/config/riscv/riscv.cc b/gcc/config/riscv/riscv.cc > index dd50fe4eddf..34f0a888c5c 100644 > --- a/gcc/config/riscv/riscv.cc > +++ b/gcc/config/riscv/riscv.cc > @@ -12644,14 +12644,26 @@ riscv_get_raw_result_mode (int regno) > /* Generate a REG rtx of Xmode from the given rtx and mode. > The rtx x can be REG (QI/HI/SI/DI) or const_int. > The machine_mode mode is the original mode from define pattern. > + The rtx_code can be ZERO_EXTEND or SIGN_EXTEND. > > - If rtx is REG and Xmode, the RTX x will be returned directly. > + If rtx is REG: > > - If rtx is REG and non-Xmode, the zero extended to new REG of Xmode will be > - returned. > + 1. If rtx Xmode, the RTX x will be returned directly. > + 2. If rtx non-Xmode, the extended to new REG of Xmode will be returned. I think you meant "the value extended into" rather than "the extended to". OK with that fix. Jeff
