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~