Thanks Kito. Committed with assertion, as well as pass the riscv regression
test.
Pan
-----Original Message-----
From: Li, Pan2
Sent: Tuesday, January 30, 2024 9:11 PM
To: Kito Cheng <kito.ch...@gmail.com>
Cc: gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org; juzhe.zh...@rivai.ai; Wang, Yanzhang
<yanzhang.w...@intel.com>
Subject: RE: [PATCH v2] RISC-V: Bugfix for vls mode aggregated in GPR calling
convention
Thanks Kito, will add assertion here, and commit it if there is no surprise in
riscv regression test.
Pan
-----Original Message-----
From: Kito Cheng <kito.ch...@gmail.com>
Sent: Tuesday, January 30, 2024 8:54 PM
To: Li, Pan2 <pan2...@intel.com>
Cc: gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org; juzhe.zh...@rivai.ai; Wang, Yanzhang
<yanzhang.w...@intel.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] RISC-V: Bugfix for vls mode aggregated in GPR calling
convention
Thanks for fixing this bug! LGTM with one minor comment :)
> diff --git a/gcc/config/riscv/riscv.cc b/gcc/config/riscv/riscv.cc
> index 7b6111aa545..1de69019cd4 100644
> --- a/gcc/config/riscv/riscv.cc
> +++ b/gcc/config/riscv/riscv.cc
> @@ -1382,6 +1382,38 @@ riscv_v_ext_mode_p (machine_mode mode)
> || riscv_v_ext_vls_mode_p (mode);
> }
>
> +static unsigned
> +riscv_v_vls_mode_aggregate_gpr_count (unsigned vls_unit_size,
> + unsigned scalar_unit_size)
> +{
> + gcc_assert (vls_unit_size != 0 && scalar_unit_size != 0);
> +
> + if (vls_unit_size < scalar_unit_size)
> + return 1;
> +
Add gcc_assert ((vls_unit_size % scalar_unit_size) == 0); here to make
sure no accident :P
> + return vls_unit_size / scalar_unit_size;
> +}
> +
