On Mon, 25 Aug 2025 07:10:26 GMT, Galder Zamarreño <[email protected]> wrote:
>> Galder Zamarreño has updated the pull request incrementally with three
>> additional commits since the last revision:
>>
>> - Add more IR node positive assertions
>> - Fix source of data for benchmarks
>> - Refactor benchmarks to TypeVectorOperations
>
> Merged and pushed latest master changes, all looks good still
@galderz I got a failure in out testing:
With VM flag: `-XX:UseAVX=1`.
Failed IR Rules (2) of Methods (2)
----------------------------------
1) Method "static java.lang.Object[]
compiler.loopopts.superword.TestCompatibleUseDefTypeSize.test6(int[],float[])"
- [Failed IR rules: 1]:
* @IR rule 1: "@compiler.lib.ir_framework.IR(phase={DEFAULT},
applyIfPlatformAnd={}, applyIfCPUFeatureOr={"sse4.1", "true", "asimd", "true",
"rvv", "true"}, counts={"_#V#LOAD_VECTOR_F#_", "> 0", "_#STORE_VECTOR#_", ">
0", "_#VECTOR_REINTERPRET#_", "> 0"}, applyIfPlatformOr={},
applyIfPlatform={"64-bit", "true"}, failOn={}, applyIfOr={},
applyIfCPUFeatureAnd={}, applyIf={}, applyIfCPUFeature={}, applyIfAnd={},
applyIfNot={})"
> Phase "PrintIdeal":
- counts: Graph contains wrong number of nodes:
* Constraint 1:
"(\\d+(\\s){2}(LoadVector.*)+(\\s){2}===.*vector[A-Za-z]<F,8>)"
- Failed comparison: [found] 0 > 0 [given]
- No nodes matched!
2) Method "static java.lang.Object[]
compiler.loopopts.superword.TestCompatibleUseDefTypeSize.test9(long[],double[])"
- [Failed IR rules: 1]:
* @IR rule 1: "@compiler.lib.ir_framework.IR(phase={DEFAULT},
applyIfPlatformAnd={}, applyIfCPUFeatureOr={"sse4.1", "true", "asimd", "true",
"rvv", "true"}, counts={"_#V#LOAD_VECTOR_D#_", "> 0", "_#STORE_VECTOR#_", ">
0", "_#VECTOR_REINTERPRET#_", "> 0"}, applyIfPlatformOr={},
applyIfPlatform={"64-bit", "true"}, failOn={}, applyIfOr={},
applyIfCPUFeatureAnd={}, applyIf={}, applyIfCPUFeature={}, applyIfAnd={},
applyIfNot={})"
> Phase "PrintIdeal":
- counts: Graph contains wrong number of nodes:
* Constraint 1:
"(\\d+(\\s){2}(LoadVector.*)+(\\s){2}===.*vector[A-Za-z]<D,4>)"
- Failed comparison: [found] 0 > 0 [given]
- No nodes matched!
I suspect that `test6` with `floatToRawIntBits` and `test9` with
`doubleToRawLongBits` are only supported with `AVX2`. Question is if that is
really supposed to be like that, or if we should even file an RFE to extend
support for `AVX1` and lower.
Can you find out why we don't vectorize with `AVX1` here?
-------------
PR Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/26457#issuecomment-3227556451
