On 9/28/19 5:17 PM, Aleksandar Markovic wrote: > Also, check on the hardware the behavior listed as 'undefined' for vsl/vsr > in the docs - even though it is tehnically irrelevant, I am courious > whether the old or the new (or none of them) solution match the hardware.
There does appear to be some odd behavior when one strays into the undefined. For example: source vector: 0102030405060708090a0b0c0d0e0f10 shift vector: 01020101010101010101010101010101 after vsl: 020806080a0c0e10121416181a1c1e20 ...this appears to use the byte-respective shift values using vsr with that result and the same shift vector: after vsr: 0182030405060708090a0b0c0d0e0f10 I expected to get back a result matching the source vector, but somehow, an extra bit got set. It would probably take some more thorough investigation to map out the undefined behavior, but I doubt there's any value to that. PC
