[WASM] Simplify SIMD shuffle opcodes.

[WASM] Simplify SIMD shuffle opcodes.
- Eliminates S32x4Shuffle, S16x8Shuffle opcodes. All shuffles are subsumed
  by S8x16Shuffle. This aligns us with the latest WASM SIMD spec.

LOG=N
BUG=v8:6020
Review-Url: https://codereview.chromium.org/2923103003
Cr-Commit-Position: refs/heads/master@{#45929}
Committed: https://chromium.googlesource.com/v8/v8/+/5d7039eac3a43909f1354a191fe26f55b7dec439

[bbudge, 2017-06-08 21:46:11]

The CQ bit was checked by bbudge@chromium.org to run a CQ dry run

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2017-06-08 21:46:14]

Dry run: CQ is trying da patch.

Follow status at:
https://chromium-cq-status.appspot.com/v2/patch-status/codereview.chromium.or...

[bbudge, 2017-06-08 21:46:59]

Description was changed from

==========
[WASM] Simplify SIMD shuffle opcodes.
- Eliminates S32x4Shuffle, S16x8Shuffle opcodes. All shuffles are subsumed
  by S8x16Shuffle.

LOG=N
BUG=v8:6020
==========

to

==========
[WASM] Simplify SIMD shuffle opcodes.
- Eliminates S32x4Shuffle, S16x8Shuffle opcodes. All shuffles are subsumed
  by S8x16Shuffle. This aligns us with the latest WASM SIMD spec.

LOG=N
BUG=v8:6020
==========

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2017-06-08 22:13:06]

The CQ bit was unchecked by commit-bot@chromium.org

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2017-06-08 22:13:07]

Dry run: This issue passed the CQ dry run.

[bbudge, 2017-06-08 23:10:15]

bbudge@chromium.org changed reviewers:
+ bmeurer@chromium.org, bradnelson@chromium.org

[bbudge, 2017-06-12 18:50:58]

The CQ bit was checked by bbudge@chromium.org to run a CQ dry run

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2017-06-12 18:51:06]

Dry run: CQ is trying da patch.

Follow status at:
https://chromium-cq-status.appspot.com/v2/patch-status/codereview.chromium.or...

[bbudge, 2017-06-12 18:52:20]

PTAL, there's a MIPS change that should probably happen after this one.

https://chromium-review.googlesource.com/c/531007/

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2017-06-12 19:17:58]

The CQ bit was unchecked by commit-bot@chromium.org

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2017-06-12 19:17:59]

Dry run: Try jobs failed on following builders:
  v8_linux_arm_rel_ng on master.tryserver.v8 (JOB_FAILED,
http://build.chromium.org/p/tryserver.v8/builders/v8_linux_arm_rel_ng/builds/...)
  v8_linux_arm_rel_ng_triggered on master.tryserver.v8 (JOB_FAILED,
http://build.chromium.org/p/tryserver.v8/builders/v8_linux_arm_rel_ng_trigger...)

[bbudge, 2017-06-12 20:36:42]

The CQ bit was checked by bbudge@chromium.org to run a CQ dry run

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2017-06-12 20:36:50]

Dry run: CQ is trying da patch.

Follow status at:
https://chromium-cq-status.appspot.com/v2/patch-status/codereview.chromium.or...

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2017-06-12 21:00:21]

The CQ bit was unchecked by commit-bot@chromium.org

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2017-06-12 21:00:22]

Dry run: This issue passed the CQ dry run.

[bbudge, 2017-06-13 21:15:21]

bbudge@chromium.org changed reviewers:
+ mtrofin@chromium.org
- bmeurer@chromium.org, bradnelson@chromium.org

[bbudge, 2017-06-13 21:15:22]

PTAL

[Mircea Trofin, 2017-06-13 22:21:46]

lgtm, some nits.

https://codereview.chromium.org/2923103003/diff/80001/src/compiler/arm/instru...
File src/compiler/arm/instruction-selector-arm.cc (right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/2923103003/diff/80001/src/compiler/arm/instru...
src/compiler/arm/instruction-selector-arm.cc:2539: for (int i = 0; i < 4; i++) {
is there a constant instead of "4" (could be more self-documenting)
also, ++i

https://codereview.chromium.org/2923103003/diff/80001/src/compiler/arm/instru...
src/compiler/arm/instruction-selector-arm.cc:2541: for (int j = 1; j < 4; j++) {
++j

https://codereview.chromium.org/2923103003/diff/80001/src/compiler/arm/instru...
src/compiler/arm/instruction-selector-arm.cc:2553: for (; i < 16 - start; i++) {
++i
also, if there were a ctant for 16?
Could we get the i in the for declaration, it'd make the 2 loops easier to read,
I think:
0; i < 16 - start, ++i

and then
16 - start; i < 16; ++i

https://codereview.chromium.org/2923103003/diff/80001/src/wasm/function-body-...
File src/wasm/function-body-decoder-impl.h (right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/2923103003/diff/80001/src/wasm/function-body-...
src/wasm/function-body-decoder-impl.h:322: for (unsigned i = 0; i < 16; i++) {
unsigned

++i

https://codereview.chromium.org/2923103003/diff/80001/src/wasm/function-body-...
File src/wasm/function-body-decoder.cc (right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/2923103003/diff/80001/src/wasm/function-body-...
src/wasm/function-body-decoder.cc:411: for (unsigned i = 0; i < 16; i++)
since we're here - could we use "uint32_t" or one of the other uint types, and
not "unsigned" (as per style guide)?

https://codereview.chromium.org/2923103003/diff/80001/src/wasm/function-body-...
src/wasm/function-body-decoder.cc:509: return 18;
nit: The old code was a bit more readable, I think.

[bbudge, 2017-06-13 23:04:14]

The CQ bit was checked by bbudge@chromium.org to run a CQ dry run

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2017-06-13 23:04:25]

Dry run: CQ is trying da patch.

Follow status at:
https://chromium-cq-status.appspot.com/v2/patch-status/codereview.chromium.or...

[bbudge, 2017-06-13 23:07:54]

https://codereview.chromium.org/2923103003/diff/80001/src/compiler/arm/instru...
File src/compiler/arm/instruction-selector-arm.cc (right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/2923103003/diff/80001/src/compiler/arm/instru...
src/compiler/arm/instruction-selector-arm.cc:2539: for (int i = 0; i < 4; i++) {
On 2017/06/13 22:21:45, Mircea Trofin wrote:
> is there a constant instead of "4" (could be more self-documenting)
> also, ++i

Done. Defined constants kLanes and kLaneSize, both equal to 4.

https://codereview.chromium.org/2923103003/diff/80001/src/compiler/arm/instru...
src/compiler/arm/instruction-selector-arm.cc:2541: for (int j = 1; j < 4; j++) {
On 2017/06/13 22:21:45, Mircea Trofin wrote:
> ++j

Done here and everywhere else.

https://codereview.chromium.org/2923103003/diff/80001/src/compiler/arm/instru...
src/compiler/arm/instruction-selector-arm.cc:2553: for (; i < 16 - start; i++) {
On 2017/06/13 22:21:45, Mircea Trofin wrote:
> ++i
> also, if there were a ctant for 16?
> Could we get the i in the for declaration, it'd make the 2 loops easier to
read,
> I think:
> 0; i < 16 - start, ++i
> 
> and then
> 16 - start; i < 16; ++i

Done, used kSimd128Size.

https://codereview.chromium.org/2923103003/diff/80001/src/wasm/function-body-...
File src/wasm/function-body-decoder-impl.h (right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/2923103003/diff/80001/src/wasm/function-body-...
src/wasm/function-body-decoder-impl.h:322: for (unsigned i = 0; i < 16; i++) {
On 2017/06/13 22:21:45, Mircea Trofin wrote:
> unsigned
> 
> ++i

Done.

https://codereview.chromium.org/2923103003/diff/80001/src/wasm/function-body-...
File src/wasm/function-body-decoder.cc (right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/2923103003/diff/80001/src/wasm/function-body-...
src/wasm/function-body-decoder.cc:411: for (unsigned i = 0; i < 16; i++)
On 2017/06/13 22:21:46, Mircea Trofin wrote:
> since we're here - could we use "uint32_t" or one of the other uint types, and
> not "unsigned" (as per style guide)?

Done.

https://codereview.chromium.org/2923103003/diff/80001/src/wasm/function-body-...
src/wasm/function-body-decoder.cc:509: return 18;
On 2017/06/13 22:21:46, Mircea Trofin wrote:
> nit: The old code was a bit more readable, I think. 

Changed to 2 + kSimd128Size.

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2017-06-13 23:30:24]

The CQ bit was unchecked by commit-bot@chromium.org

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2017-06-13 23:30:25]

Dry run: This issue passed the CQ dry run.

[bbudge, 2017-06-13 23:38:56]

The CQ bit was checked by bbudge@chromium.org

[bbudge, 2017-06-13 23:38:57]

The patchset sent to the CQ was uploaded after l-g-t-m from mtrofin@chromium.org
Link to the patchset: https://codereview.chromium.org/2923103003/#ps120001
(title: "Mircea's review comments.")

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2017-06-13 23:39:06]

CQ is trying da patch.

Follow status at:
https://chromium-cq-status.appspot.com/v2/patch-status/codereview.chromium.or...

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2017-06-13 23:40:52]

CQ is committing da patch.

Bot data: {"patchset_id": 120001, "attempt_start_ts": 1497397136936820,
"parent_rev": "a4cf434f5bf4019373460ffd917697167c212501", "commit_rev":
"5d7039eac3a43909f1354a191fe26f55b7dec439"}

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2017-06-13 23:40:59]

Description was changed from

==========
[WASM] Simplify SIMD shuffle opcodes.
- Eliminates S32x4Shuffle, S16x8Shuffle opcodes. All shuffles are subsumed
  by S8x16Shuffle. This aligns us with the latest WASM SIMD spec.

LOG=N
BUG=v8:6020
==========

to

==========
[WASM] Simplify SIMD shuffle opcodes.
- Eliminates S32x4Shuffle, S16x8Shuffle opcodes. All shuffles are subsumed
  by S8x16Shuffle. This aligns us with the latest WASM SIMD spec.

LOG=N
BUG=v8:6020

Review-Url: https://codereview.chromium.org/2923103003
Cr-Commit-Position: refs/heads/master@{#45929}
Committed:
https://chromium.googlesource.com/v8/v8/+/5d7039eac3a43909f1354a191fe26f55b7d...
==========

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2017-06-13 23:41:01]

Committed patchset #7 (id:120001) as
https://chromium.googlesource.com/v8/v8/+/5d7039eac3a43909f1354a191fe26f55b7d...