I attempted to write a sequence that addresses that observation, along with a couple other pedantic details, and posted it to the ticket. 

https://github.com/riscv/riscv-v-spec/issues/623

On Sat, Jan 30, 2021 at 11:37 AM Bill Huffman <huffman@...> wrote:

Krste,



I think the round float to integer as float sequence needs to use vmfle.vf with the usage of the mask inverted.  Otherwise NaN values will use the integer instead of the original NaN.



      Bill



-----Original Message-----

From: tech-vector-ext@... <tech-vector-ext@...> On Behalf Of Krste Asanovic

Sent: Friday, January 29, 2021 8:52 PM

To: tech-vector-ext@...

Subject: [RISC-V] [tech-vector-ext] Vector TG minutes, 2021/1/29



EXTERNAL MAIL







Date: 2021/01/29

Task Group: Vector Extension

Chair: Krste Asanovic

Co-Chair: Roger Espasa

Number of Attendees: ~16

Current issues on github: https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://github.com/riscv/riscv-v-spec__;!!EHscmS1ygiU1lA!S65qKyz6MSIPofhHPvb7N7aMd1B9iyvNSfZqcbXAgxL4BM6BEBnR3Y3RZOmaCz8$



# Meetings



Meetings will continue in the regular Friday time slot as given on the task groups' Google calendar.



# v0.10 release



Version v0.10 (zero-point-ten) is tagged in repo, incorporating all specification changes agreed to date.  A numbered version was requested by toolchain folks to help with their release process.  An archived pdf build of v0.10 is available at:



https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://github.com/riscv/riscv-v-spec/releases/download/v0.10/riscv-v-spec-0.10.pdf__;!!EHscmS1ygiU1lA!S65qKyz6MSIPofhHPvb7N7aMd1B9iyvNSfZqcbXAgxL4BM6BEBnR3Y3RUN2S-AA$



This version is intended to provide a stable milestone for internal development, but is not ready for public review or ratification.

However, the intent is that there are no substantial changes in instruction specifications before reaching frozen v1.0 status for public review, though of course there cannot be any guarantees.  The repo version name has been updated for the next stage of editing.



Issues discussed:



#623  Round Float to integer as float



The current ISA spec does not have an instruction that rounds a float to an integer but leaving result as a float (IEEE RoundToIntegral*).

The following five vector instruction sequence was quickly proposed, but not checked for correctness or completeness:

    vfcvt.rtz.x.f.v v8, v4     # Round to integer of same width (could use frm)

    vfcvt.f.x.v v8, v8         # Round back to float of same width

    vfabs.f.f.v v12, v4        # Get magnitude of original value.

    vmfgt.vf v0, v4, f0        # Is large integer already? f0 has threshold.

    vmerge.vvm v4, v8, v4, v0  # Leave alone if already an integer



Group was to evaluate correct equivalent sequence and to determine relative importance of supporting the operation directly.



#550 Zve* subsets



There was discussion on the exact composition of the Zve* subsets, though mostly there was agreement with decisions in earlier meetings.

One question is whether multiplies that produce the upper word of a ELEN*ELEN-bit product (vmulh* and vsmul*) should be mandated on all embedded subsets when ELEN>=64.

Krste,



I think the round float to integer as float sequence needs to use vmfle.vf with the usage of the mask inverted.  Otherwise NaN values will use the integer instead of the original NaN.



      Bill



-----Original Message-----

From: tech-vector-ext@... <tech-vector-ext@...> On Behalf Of Krste Asanovic

Sent: Friday, January 29, 2021 8:52 PM

To: tech-vector-ext@...

Subject: [RISC-V] [tech-vector-ext] Vector TG minutes, 2021/1/29



EXTERNAL MAIL







Date: 2021/01/29

Task Group: Vector Extension

Chair: Krste Asanovic

Co-Chair: Roger Espasa

Number of Attendees: ~16

Current issues on github: https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://github.com/riscv/riscv-v-spec__;!!EHscmS1ygiU1lA!S65qKyz6MSIPofhHPvb7N7aMd1B9iyvNSfZqcbXAgxL4BM6BEBnR3Y3RZOmaCz8$



# Meetings



Meetings will continue in the regular Friday time slot as given on the task groups' Google calendar.



# v0.10 release



Version v0.10 (zero-point-ten) is tagged in repo, incorporating all specification changes agreed to date.  A numbered version was requested by toolchain folks to help with their release process.  An archived pdf build of v0.10 is available at:



https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://github.com/riscv/riscv-v-spec/releases/download/v0.10/riscv-v-spec-0.10.pdf__;!!EHscmS1ygiU1lA!S65qKyz6MSIPofhHPvb7N7aMd1B9iyvNSfZqcbXAgxL4BM6BEBnR3Y3RUN2S-AA$



This version is intended to provide a stable milestone for internal development, but is not ready for public review or ratification.

However, the intent is that there are no substantial changes in instruction specifications before reaching frozen v1.0 status for public review, though of course there cannot be any guarantees.  The repo version name has been updated for the next stage of editing.



Issues discussed:



#623  Round Float to integer as float



The current ISA spec does not have an instruction that rounds a float to an integer but leaving result as a float (IEEE RoundToIntegral*).

The following five vector instruction sequence was quickly proposed, but not checked for correctness or completeness:

    vfcvt.rtz.x.f.v v8, v4     # Round to integer of same width (could use frm)

    vfcvt.f.x.v v8, v8         # Round back to float of same width

    vfabs.f.f.v v12, v4        # Get magnitude of original value.

    vmfgt.vf v0, v4, f0        # Is large integer already? f0 has threshold.

    vmerge.vvm v4, v8, v4, v0  # Leave alone if already an integer



Group was to evaluate correct equivalent sequence and to determine relative importance of supporting the operation directly.



#550 Zve* subsets



There was discussion on the exact composition of the Zve* subsets, though mostly there was agreement with decisions in earlier meetings.

One question is whether multiplies that produce the upper word of a ELEN*ELEN-bit product (vmulh* and vsmul*) should be mandated on all embedded subsets when ELEN>=64.

I was going to restart the vector TG meetings next week (Jan 29), and have a goal of having most pending updates added to the spec a few days before then.

Krste

for vsetivli, with the uimm=00000 encoding, rather than setting vl to 32, how setting it to some other meaning?

one option is to set vl=VLMAX. i have some concerns about software using this safely (eg, if VLMAX turns out to be much larger than software anticipated, then it would fail; correcting this requires more instructions than just using the regular vsetvl/vsetvli would have used). 

another option is to allow an implementation-defined vl to be chosen by hardware; this could be anywhere between 1 and VLMAX. for example, implementations may just choose vl=32, or they may choose something else. it allows the CPU architect to devise a scheme that best fits the implementation. this may consider factors like the effective width of the execution engine, the pipeline depth (to reduce likelihood of stalls from dependent instructions), or that the vector register file is actually a multi-level memory hierarchy where some smaller values may operate with greater efficiency (lower power), or matching VL to the optimal memory system burst length. perhaps some guidance by the spec could be given here for the default scheme, eg whether the implementation optimizes for best performance or power (while still allowing implementations to modify this default via an implementation-defined CSR). software using a few extra cycles to check the returned vl against AVL should not a big problem (the simplest solution being vsetvli followed by vsetivli)

g

On Fri, Dec 18, 2020 at 6:13 PM Krste Asanovic <krste@...> wrote:

# vsetivli

A new variant of vsetvl was proposed providing an immediate as the AVL
in rs1[4:0].  The immediate encoding is the same as for CSR immediate
instructions. The instruction would have bit 31:30 = 11 and bits 29:20
would be encoded same as vsetvli.

This would be used when AVL was statically known, and known to fit
inside vector register group.  Compared with existing PoR, it removes
need to load immediate into a spare scalar register before executing
vsetvli, and is useful for handling scalar values in vector register
(vl=1) and other cases where short fixed-sized vectors are the
datatype (e.g., graphics).

There was discussion on whether uimm=00000 should represent 32 or be
reserved.  32 is more useful, but adds a little complexity to
hardware.

There was also discussion on whether instruction should set vill if
selected AVL is not supported, or whether should clip vl to VLMAX as
with other instructions, or if behavior should be reserved.  Group
generally favored writing vill to expose software errors.

# vsetivli

A new variant of vsetvl was proposed providing an immediate as the AVL
in rs1[4:0].  The immediate encoding is the same as for CSR immediate
instructions. The instruction would have bit 31:30 = 11 and bits 29:20
would be encoded same as vsetvli.

This would be used when AVL was statically known, and known to fit
inside vector register group.  Compared with existing PoR, it removes
need to load immediate into a spare scalar register before executing
vsetvli, and is useful for handling scalar values in vector register
(vl=1) and other cases where short fixed-sized vectors are the
datatype (e.g., graphics).

There was discussion on whether uimm=00000 should represent 32 or be
reserved.  32 is more useful, but adds a little complexity to
hardware.

There was also discussion on whether instruction should set vill if
selected AVL is not supported, or whether should clip vl to VLMAX as
with other instructions, or if behavior should be reserved.  Group
generally favored writing vill to expose software errors.