Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH 05/38] tcg: Allow add_vec, sub_vec, neg_vec, not_vec to be expanded

[David Hildenbrand]

On 20.04.19 09:34, Richard Henderson wrote:
> Signed-off-by: Richard Henderson <address@hidden>
> ---
>  tcg/tcg-op-vec.c | 49 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++----------------
>  1 file changed, 33 insertions(+), 16 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/tcg/tcg-op-vec.c b/tcg/tcg-op-vec.c
> index 27f65600c3..cfb18682b1 100644
> --- a/tcg/tcg-op-vec.c
> +++ b/tcg/tcg-op-vec.c
> @@ -226,16 +226,6 @@ void tcg_gen_stl_vec(TCGv_vec r, TCGv_ptr b, TCGArg o, 
> TCGType low_type)
>      vec_gen_3(INDEX_op_st_vec, low_type, 0, ri, bi, o);
>  }
>  
> -void tcg_gen_add_vec(unsigned vece, TCGv_vec r, TCGv_vec a, TCGv_vec b)
> -{
> -    vec_gen_op3(INDEX_op_add_vec, vece, r, a, b);
> -}
> -
> -void tcg_gen_sub_vec(unsigned vece, TCGv_vec r, TCGv_vec a, TCGv_vec b)
> -{
> -    vec_gen_op3(INDEX_op_sub_vec, vece, r, a, b);
> -}
> -
>  void tcg_gen_and_vec(unsigned vece, TCGv_vec r, TCGv_vec a, TCGv_vec b)
>  {
>      vec_gen_op3(INDEX_op_and_vec, 0, r, a, b);
> @@ -296,11 +286,30 @@ void tcg_gen_eqv_vec(unsigned vece, TCGv_vec r, 
> TCGv_vec a, TCGv_vec b)
>      tcg_gen_not_vec(0, r, r);
>  }
>  
> +static bool do_op2(unsigned vece, TCGv_vec r, TCGv_vec a, TCGOpcode opc)
> +{
> +    TCGTemp *rt = tcgv_vec_temp(r);
> +    TCGTemp *at = tcgv_vec_temp(a);
> +    TCGArg ri = temp_arg(rt);
> +    TCGArg ai = temp_arg(at);
> +    TCGType type = rt->base_type;
> +    int can;
> +
> +    tcg_debug_assert(at->base_type >= type);
> +    can = tcg_can_emit_vec_op(opc, type, vece);
> +    if (can > 0) {
> +        vec_gen_2(opc, type, vece, ri, ai);
> +    } else if (can < 0) {
> +        tcg_expand_vec_op(opc, type, vece, ri, ai);
> +    } else {
> +        return false;
> +    }
> +    return true;
> +}

I'd do

    if (can > 0) {
       vec_gen_2(opc, type, vece, ri, ai);
       return true;
    } else if (can < 0) {
       tcg_expand_vec_op(opc, type, vece, ri, ai);
       return true;
    }
    return false;


Or less readable "return can != 0;"

Reviewed-by: David Hildenbrand <address@hidden>

-- 

Thanks,

David / dhildenb