On Tue, 27 May 2014, Bin.Cheng wrote:
> There are some other similar cases in vectorizer and all of them look
> suspicious since intuitively, vectorizer should neither care about
> target endianess nor do such shuffle. Anyway, this is how we do
> vectorization currently.
Agreed. The semantics o
On Tue, May 27, 2014 at 10:24 AM, Bin.Cheng wrote:
> Hi,
>
> To attract more eyes, I should have used a scarier subject like "GCC's
> vectorizer is heading in the wrong direction on big-endian targets".
>
> The idea came from a simple vectorization case I ran into and a
> discussion with Richard.
Hi,
To attract more eyes, I should have used a scarier subject like "GCC's
vectorizer is heading in the wrong direction on big-endian targets".
The idea came from a simple vectorization case I ran into and a
discussion with Richard. Given simple case like:
typedef signed short *__restrict__ pRS
