RFR: 8329077: C2 SuperWord: Add MoveD2L, MoveL2D, MoveF2I, MoveI2F [v5]
Galder Zamarreño
galder at openjdk.org
Mon Sep 1 09:03:28 UTC 2025
On Mon, 1 Sep 2025 08:44:10 GMT, Emanuel Peter <epeter at openjdk.org> wrote:
>> Galder Zamarreño has updated the pull request with a new target base due to a merge or a rebase. The incremental webrev excludes the unrelated changes brought in by the merge/rebase. The pull request contains 22 additional commits since the last revision:
>>
>> - Merge branch 'master' into topic.fp-bits-vector
>> - Add more IR node positive assertions
>> - Fix source of data for benchmarks
>> - Refactor benchmarks to TypeVectorOperations
>> - Check at the very least that auto vectorization is supported
>> - Avoid VectorReinterpret::implemented
>> - Refactor and add copyright header
>> - Rephrase comment
>> - Removed unnecessary assert methods
>> - Adjust IR test after adding Move* vector support
>> - ... and 12 more: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/compare/57cf332d...e7e4d801
>
> test/hotspot/jtreg/compiler/loopopts/superword/TestCompatibleUseDefTypeSize.java line 460:
>
>> 458: @IR(counts = {IRNode.LOAD_VECTOR_L, "> 0",
>> 459: IRNode.STORE_VECTOR, "> 0",
>> 460: IRNode.VECTOR_REINTERPRET, "> 0"},
>
> Ah, I just saw that `VECTOR_REINTERPRET` is no `vectorNode`, so we don't check the size for it. Would it have a type and size though?
>
> If so, we could consider making it more precise, like all the vector casts.
> Would be a little bit of work, but it would make the rules more precise.
> Could also be a separate RFE.
>
>
> 2458 public static final String VECTOR_REINTERPRET = PREFIX + "VECTOR_REINTERPRET" + POSTFIX;
> 2459 static {
> 2460 beforeMatchingNameRegex(VECTOR_REINTERPRET, "VectorReinterpret");
> 2461 }
> 2462
> 2463 public static final String VECTOR_UCAST_B2S = VECTOR_PREFIX + "VECTOR_UCAST_B2S" + POSTFIX;
> 2464 static {
> 2465 vectorNode(VECTOR_UCAST_B2S, "VectorUCastB2X", TYPE_SHORT);
> 2466 }
>
>
> Depending on the dump, it may not be so easy though. Not sure.
That makes sense, I'll create a separate RFE for that
-------------
PR Review Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/26457#discussion_r2313333399
More information about the core-libs-dev
mailing list