On 5/28/19 8:02 AM, David Hildenbrand wrote:
> On 28.05.19 14:55, Richard Henderson wrote:
>> On 5/24/19 4:33 AM, David Hildenbrand wrote:
>>> + /* identify the smaller element */
>>> + if (first_inequal < 16) {
>>> + uint8_t enr = first_inequal / (1 << es);
>>> + uint32_t a = s390_vec_read_element(v2, enr, es);
>>> + uint32_t b = s390_vec_read_element(v3, enr, es);
>>> +
>>> + smaller = a < b;
>>> + }
>>> +
>>> + if (zs) {
>>> + z0 = zero_search(a0, mask);
>>> + z1 = zero_search(a1, mask);
>>> + first_zero = match_index(z0, z1);
>>> + }
>>> +
>>> + s390_vec_write_element64(v1, 0, MIN(first_inequal, first_zero));
>>> + s390_vec_write_element64(v1, 1, 0);
>>> + if (first_zero == 16 && first_inequal == 16) {
>>> + return 3;
>>> + } else if (first_zero < first_inequal) {
>>> + return 0;
>>> + }
>>> + return smaller ? 1 : 2;
>>
>> Perhaps move the computation of smaller down here where it is used.
>
> Wanted to do that but then I realized that I would have to move
> s390_vec_write_element64() as well, because v1 and v2/v3 could overlap.
Oh, yes of course. R-B without any changes. ;-)
r~
