On 1 February 2011 14:01, Ulrich Weigand Ulrich.Weigand@de.ibm.com wrote:
Ira Rosen ira.rosen@linaro.org wrote:
After testing only with the vectorizer testsuite (which contains at least 30 tests for strided accesses), I'd appreciate comments on the patch before I start full testing (cross testing with qemu doesn't work so well for NEON).
I cannot really comment on the ARM semantics, but just from the point of view of how the .md file looks:
- You define new patterns neon_vzip<mode>_interleave etc. instead of using
the existing neon_vzip<mode>_internal etc., presumably because the existing patterns are broken. But because they are actually broken, they should rather be fixed themselves (and *then* used instead of duplicated).
Are they actually broken ? I'd be worried if that were the case. My understanding is that the existing ones are being used for the Neon intrinsics / builtins.
It would be a good thing to integrate the 2 of them together if at all possible.
Ramana