[Bug target/112531] [14] RISC-V: gcc.dg/unroll-8.c rtl-dump scan errors with --param=riscv-autovec-preference=scalable

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112531 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Target|riscv |riscv aarch64-*-* CC|

[Bug target/112531] [14] RISC-V: gcc.dg/unroll-8.c rtl-dump scan errors with --param=riscv-autovec-preference=scalable

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112531 palmer at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Last reconfirmed||2023-11-21 Ever

[Bug target/112531] [14] RISC-V: gcc.dg/unroll-8.c rtl-dump scan errors with --param=riscv-autovec-preference=scalable

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112531 --- Comment #4 from Robin Dapp --- Personally, I don't mind having some FAILs as long as we know them and understand the reason for them. I wouldn't insist on "fixing" them but don't mind if others prefer to have the results "clean".

[Bug target/112531] [14] RISC-V: gcc.dg/unroll-8.c rtl-dump scan errors with --param=riscv-autovec-preference=scalable

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112531 --- Comment #3 from Edwin Lu --- (In reply to JuzheZhong from comment #1) > This FAIL is reasonable. So we can ignore it. > > The vectorized code will fail at this dump check like ARM SVE: > https://godbolt.org/z/dbsKb7bxY > > Or you can fix

[Bug target/112531] [14] RISC-V: gcc.dg/unroll-8.c rtl-dump scan errors with --param=riscv-autovec-preference=scalable

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112531 --- Comment #2 from Robin Dapp --- Yes, I'd also argue in favor of -fno-tree-vectorize here.

[Bug target/112531] [14] RISC-V: gcc.dg/unroll-8.c rtl-dump scan errors with --param=riscv-autovec-preference=scalable

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112531 JuzheZhong changed: What|Removed |Added CC||juzhe.zhong at rivai dot ai --- Comment