The AVX saga continues.
I am attempting to write a pattern for VEXTRACTF128 but am having some
problems. My attempt looks something like this:
defm EXTRACTF128 : avx_fp_extract_vector_osta_node_mri_256<0x19, MRMDestReg,
MRMDestMem, "extractf128", undef, X86f32,
X86i32i8,
// rr
[(set VR128:$dst,
(v4f32 (vector_shuffle
(v8f32 undef), (v8f32 VR256:$src1),
VEXTRACTF128_shuffle_mask:$src2)))]>;
(This is simplified for the sake of exposition but this gets the idea across).
TableGen reports a type contradition:
VEXTRACTF128_256mri: (st:isVoid (vector_shuffle:v4f32 (undef:v8f32),
VR256:v8f32:$src1,
(build_vector)<<P:Predicate_VEXTRACTF128_shuffle_mask>>:
$src2), addr:iPTR:
$dst)<<P:Predicate_unindexedstore>><<P:Predicate_store>><<P:Predicate_alignedstore>>
tblgen: In VEXTRACTF128_256mri: Type inference contradiction found in node
vector_shuffle!
Well, it's right! So how do I express this kind of thing? Since LLVM 2.5
shufflevector supports creating a vector of a difference size than the
inputs. Which is exactly what we need for VEXTRACTF128 and VINSERTF128.
-Dave
On Wednesday 02 December 2009 17:46, David Greene wrote:> VEXTRACTF128_256mri: (st:isVoid (vector_shuffle:v4f32 (undef:v8f32), > VR256:v8f32:$src1, (build_vector)<<P:Predicate_VEXTRACTF128_shuffle_mask>>: > $src2), addr:iPTR: > $dst)<<P:Predicate_unindexedstore>><<P:Predicate_store>><<P:Predicate_align >edstore>> tblgen: In VEXTRACTF128_256mri: Type inference contradiction found > in node vector_shuffle! > > Well, it's right! So how do I express this kind of thing? Since LLVM 2.5 > shufflevector supports creating a vector of a difference size than the > inputs. Which is exactly what we need for VEXTRACTF128 and VINSERTF128.I suppose I could add an extract_subreg to make TableGen happy about types. This is already custom lowered so it wouldn't be hard to do. Is that the correct approach here? -Dave
On Dec 2, 2009, at 3:46 PM, David Greene wrote:> Well, it's right! So how do I express this kind of thing? Since LLVM 2.5 > shufflevector supports creating a vector of a difference size than the > inputs. Which is exactly what we need for VEXTRACTF128 and VINSERTF128.I think the SelectionDAG vector_shuffle node still requires the vector types to match. The LLVM IR shuffles can have a different size, but they are forced to match when building the SelectionDAG.
On Wed, Dec 2, 2009 at 3:46 PM, David Greene <dag at cray.com> wrote:> The AVX saga continues. > > I am attempting to write a pattern for VEXTRACTF128 but am having some > problems. My attempt looks something like this: > > defm EXTRACTF128 : avx_fp_extract_vector_osta_node_mri_256<0x19, MRMDestReg, > MRMDestMem, "extractf128", undef, X86f32, X86i32i8, > // rr > [(set VR128:$dst, > (v4f32 (vector_shuffle > (v8f32 undef), (v8f32 VR256:$src1), > VEXTRACTF128_shuffle_mask:$src2)))]>; > > (This is simplified for the sake of exposition but this gets the idea across). > > TableGen reports a type contradition: > > VEXTRACTF128_256mri: (st:isVoid (vector_shuffle:v4f32 (undef:v8f32), > VR256:v8f32:$src1, (build_vector)<<P:Predicate_VEXTRACTF128_shuffle_mask>>: > $src2), addr:iPTR: > $dst)<<P:Predicate_unindexedstore>><<P:Predicate_store>><<P:Predicate_alignedstore>> > tblgen: In VEXTRACTF128_256mri: Type inference contradiction found in node > vector_shuffle! > > Well, it's right! So how do I express this kind of thing? Since LLVM 2.5 > shufflevector supports creating a vector of a difference size than the > inputs. Which is exactly what we need for VEXTRACTF128 and VINSERTF128.Perhaps EXTRACT_SUBVECTOR would be more appropriate here? -Eli
On Dec 2, 2009, at 3:55 PM, Bob Wilson wrote:> > On Dec 2, 2009, at 3:46 PM, David Greene wrote: >> Well, it's right! So how do I express this kind of thing? Since LLVM 2.5 >> shufflevector supports creating a vector of a difference size than the >> inputs. Which is exactly what we need for VEXTRACTF128 and VINSERTF128. > > I think the SelectionDAG vector_shuffle node still requires the vector types to match. The LLVM IR shuffles can have a different size, but they are forced to match when building the SelectionDAG.It would be really great if the SelectionDAG shuffle node had the same flexibility as the IR instruction, w.r.t. different sized inputs and outputs. Nate
On Wednesday 02 December 2009 18:26, Eli Friedman wrote:> > Well, it's right! So how do I express this kind of thing? Since LLVM > > 2.5 shufflevector supports creating a vector of a difference size than > > the inputs. Which is exactly what we need for VEXTRACTF128 and > > VINSERTF128. > > Perhaps EXTRACT_SUBVECTOR would be more appropriate here?Except there's no upper 128-bit subvector of a ymm register, which is why we need VEXTRACTF128 / VINSERTF128. It's a big pain in the rear. -Dave