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~

Reply via email to