core.simd woes

[Manu]

On 8 October 2012 23:05, Iain Buclaw <ibuclaw at ubuntu.com> wrote:

> On 7 October 2012 13:12, Manu <turkeyman at gmail.com> wrote:
> > On 5 October 2012 14:46, Iain Buclaw <ibuclaw at ubuntu.com> wrote:
> >>
> >> On 5 October 2012 11:28, Manu <turkeyman at gmail.com> wrote:
> >> > On 3 October 2012 16:40, Iain Buclaw <ibuclaw at ubuntu.com> wrote:
> >> >>
> >> >> On 3 October 2012 02:31, jerro <a at a.com> wrote:
> >> >> >> import core.simd, std.stdio;
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> void main()
> >> >> >> {
> >> >> >>   float4 a = 1, b = 2;
> >> >> >>   writeln((a + b).array); // WORKS: [3, 3, 3, 3]
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >>   float4 c = [1, 2, 3, 4]; // ERROR: "Stored value type does
> >> >> >>                            // not match pointer operand type!"
> >> >> >>                            // [..a bunch of LLVM error code..]
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >>   float4 c = 0, d = 1;
> >> >> >>   c.array[0] = 4;
> >> >> >>   c.ptr[1] = 4;
> >> >> >>   writeln((c + d).array); // WRONG: [1, 1, 1, 1]
> >> >> >> }
> >> >> >
> >> >> >
> >> >> > Oh, that doesn't work for me either. I never tried to use those,
> so I
> >> >> > didn't
> >> >> > notice that before. This code gives me internal compiler errors
> with
> >> >> > GDC
> >> >> > and
> >> >> > DMD too (with "float4 c = [1, 2, 3, 4]" commented out). I'm using
> DMD
> >> >> > 2.060
> >> >> > and a recent versions of GDC and LDC on 64 bit Linux.
> >> >>
> >> >> Then don't just talk about it, raise a bug - otherwise how do you
> >> >> expect it to get fixed!  ( http://www.gdcproject.org/bugzilla )
> >> >>
> >> >> I've made a note of the error you get with `__vector(float[4]) c =
> >> >> [1,2,3,4];' - That is because vector expressions implementation is
> >> >> very basic at the moment.  Look forward to hear from all your
> >> >> experiences so we can make vector support rock solid in GDC. ;-)
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > I didn't realise vector literals like that were supported properly in
> >> > the
> >> > front end yet?
> >> > Do they work at all? What does the code generated look like?
> >>
> >> They get passed to the backend as of 2.060 - so looks like the
> >> semantic passes now allow them.
> >>
> >> I've just recently added backend support in GDC -
> >>
> >>
> https://github.com/D-Programming-GDC/GDC/commit/7ada3d95b8af1b271d82f1ec5208f0b689eb143c#L1R1194
> >>
> >> The codegen looks like so:
> >>
> >> float4 a = 2;
> >> float4 b = [1,2,3,4];
> >>
> >> ==>
> >> vector(4) float a = { 2.0e+0, 2.0e+0, 2.0e+0, 2.0e+0 };
> >> vector(4) float b = { 1.0e+0, 2.0e+0, 3.0e+0, 4.0e+0 };
> >>
> >> ==>
> >>         movaps  .LC0, %xmm0
> >>         movaps  %xmm0, -24(%ebp)
> >>         movaps  .LC1, %xmm0
> >>         movaps  %xmm0, -40(%ebp)
> >>
> >>         .align 16
> >> .LC0:
> >>         .long   1073741824
> >>         .long   1073741824
> >>         .long   1073741824
> >>         .long   1073741824
> >>         .align 16
> >> .LC1:
> >>         .long   1065353216
> >>         .long   1073741824
> >>         .long   1077936128
> >>         .long   1082130432
> >
> >
> > Perfect!
> > I can get on with my unittests :P
>
> I fixed them again.
>
>
> https://github.com/D-Programming-GDC/GDC/commit/9402516e0b07031e841a15849f5dc94ae81dccdc#L4R1201
>
>
> float a = 1, b = 2, c = 3, d = 4;
> float4 f = [a,b,c,d];
>
> ===>
>         movss   -16(%rbp), %xmm0
>         movss   -12(%rbp), %xmm1
>

Errr, that's not fixed...?
movss is not the opcode you're looking for.
Surely that should produce a single movaps...
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.puremagic.com/pipermail/digitalmars-d/attachments/20121009/072b09a0/attachment-0001.html>