Displaying 3 results from an estimated 3 matches for "vunpcklpdi".
Did you mean:
vunpcklpdy
2011 Feb 26
0
[LLVMdev] X86 LowerVECTOR_SHUFFLE Question
David Greene <dag at cray.com> writes:
> In ToT, LowerVECTOR_SHUFFLE for x86 has this code:
>
> if (X86::isUNPCKLMask(SVOp))
> getTargetShuffleNode(getUNPCKLOpcode(VT) dl, VT, V1, V2, DAG);
>
> why would this not be:
>
> if (X86::isUNPCKLMask(SVOp))
> return SVOp;
Ok, I discovered that Bruno did this in revisions 112934, 112942 and
113020 but the logs
2011 Feb 25
2
[LLVMdev] X86 LowerVECTOR_SHUFFLE Question
In ToT, LowerVECTOR_SHUFFLE for x86 has this code:
if (X86::isUNPCKLMask(SVOp))
getTargetShuffleNode(getUNPCKLOpcode(VT) dl, VT, V1, V2, DAG);
why would this not be:
if (X86::isUNPCKLMask(SVOp))
return SVOp;
I'm trying to add support for VUNPCKL and am getting into trouble
because the existing code ends up creating:
VUNPCKLPS
load
load
which is badness come selection
2011 Feb 26
2
[LLVMdev] X86 LowerVECTOR_SHUFFLE Question
It is inefficient and error-prone to recognize legal shuffles and then have isel repeat the process. For example, if the DAG combiner changes a shuffle in between legalization and isel, it may stop being legal and break isel. By legalizing to target-specific DAG nodes, we avoid that possibility and also make it much easier to match the shuffles during isel.
On Feb 25, 2011, at 6:01 PM, David A.