> Maybe I should pretend RVV support vect_pack/vect_unpack and enable > all the tests in target-supports.exp?
The problem is that vect_pack/unpack is an overloaded term in the moment meaning "vector conversion" (promotion/demotion) or so. This test does not require pack/unpack for successful vectorization but our method of keeping the number of elements the same works as well. The naming probably precedes vectorizer support for that. I can't imagine cases where vectorization would fail because of this as we can always work around it some way. So from that point of view "pretending" to support it would work. However in case somebody wants to really write a specific test cases that relies on pack/unpack (maybe there are already some?) "pretending" would fail. I lean towards "pretending" at the moment ;) The other option would be to rename that and audit all test cases. Note there are also vect_intfloat_cvt as well as others that don't have pack/unpack in the name (that we also probably still need to enable). Regards Robin
