More folding to vpternlogd?

Open
#107,619 8 comments 4 reactions 2 assignees View on GitHub

@kendall1997 is already working on this.

Since May 29, 2025.

Assessment

This issue has not been assessed yet.

Description

area-CodeGen-coreclr

Based on the description in https://github.com/dotnet/runtime/pull/91227, I thought each of the following might both compile down to a single vpternlogd:

static Vector512<int> Exp1(Vector512<int> a, Vector512<int> b, Vector512<int> c) =>
    Vector512.ConditionalSelect(a, b & c, b | c);

static Vector512<int> Exp2(Vector512<int> a, Vector512<int> b, Vector512<int> c) =>
    (a & (b & c)) | (~a & (b | c));

but they don't today. The first results in a vpternlogd, but it's the standard one for ConditionalSelect used to choose between the results, and it's thus still computing the and and or separately:

vmovups zmm0, zmmword ptr [r8]
vmovups zmm1, zmmword ptr [r9]
vpandd zmm2, zmm1, zmm0
vpord zmm0, zmm1, zmm0
vpternlogd zmm0, zmm2, zmmword ptr [rdx], -40

The second results in two vpternlogds that are then or'd together:

vmovups zmm0, zmmword ptr [rdx]
vmovups zmm1, zmmword ptr [r8]
vmovups zmm2, zmmword ptr [r9]
vmovaps zmm3, zmm0
vpternlogd zmm3, zmm2, zmm1, -128
vpternlogd zmm2, zmm1, zmm0, 84
vpord zmm0, zmm2, zmm3

rather than a single vpternlogd that handles the whole bitwise operation.

Is this just further opportunity? Or is there something preventing such optimization?

cc: @tannergooding, @EgorBo

Dominant language
C#
Stars
18.3k
Forks
5.6k
PR metrics pending

Contributor guide

Open the contributing guide

First steps

  1. Read the whole issue, then the project's contributing guide.
  2. Comment on the issue to say you are picking it up — it saves two people doing the same work.
  3. Fork the repository and make your change on a branch.
  4. Open a pull request that references the issue number.

More from dotnet/runtime

All issues in dotnet/runtime

Similar issues

More C# issues

Get new issues in your inbox

A short digest of beginner-friendly GitHub issues.