search for: widenvecres_unary

...VecRes_Binary match WidenVecRes_{Unary/Ternary} and it does the promotion and generates much better code. Why is WidenVecRes_Binary so much more complicated than the Unary/Binary functions? None of the operations in the cases for WidenVecRes_Binary seem any more special then the operations that use WidenVecRes_Unary.. paul On Aug 12, 2013, at 10:46 AM, Redmond, Paul <paul.redmond at intel.com<mailto:paul.redmond at intel.com>> wrote: Hi Nadav, On 2013-08-12 12:59 PM, "Nadav Rotem" <nrotem at apple.com<mailto:nrotem at apple.com>> wrote: Hi Paul, You can read about it he...

...VecRes_Binary match WidenVecRes_{Unary/Ternary} and it does the promotion and generates much better code. Why is WidenVecRes_Binary so much more complicated than the Unary/Binary functions? None of the operations in the cases for WidenVecRes_Binary seem any more special then the operations that use WidenVecRes_Unary.. I am not sure :) -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/attachments/20130812/4bf2a7f5/attachment.html>

This is a bug in the implementation of WidenVecRes_Binary. On line 1546 it assumes that “Widen” is the last phase of type-legalization and we check if the result is a legal type. But actually we want to continue and promote the elements of the vector. In other cases we may want to widen (to the next power of two) and later split in half because the vector is too big. On Aug 12, 2013, at 10:46

Hi Nadav, On 2013-08-12 12:59 PM, "Nadav Rotem" <nrotem at apple.com> wrote: >Hi Paul, > >You can read about it here: >http://blog.llvm.org/2011/12/llvm-31-vector-changes.html > >> Hi, >> >> I am trying to understand how vector type legalization works. In >>particular, I'm looking at i8 vector types on x86 (with sse42 features)