http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59519
--- Comment #13 from Jakub Jelinek jakub at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: jakub
Date: Sat Jan 4 11:23:16 2014
New Revision: 206333
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=206333root=gccview=rev
Log:
PR tree-optimization/59519
*
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59519
Jakub Jelinek jakub at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59519
--- Comment #8 from Jakub Jelinek jakub at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to bin.cheng from comment #7)
(In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #6)
Created attachment 31562 [details]
gcc49-pr59519.patch
I wonder if this isn't just a
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59519
--- Comment #9 from Jakub Jelinek jakub at gcc dot gnu.org ---
BTW, the patch can hardly regress anything, it only affects cases that ICEd
before the patch.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59519
--- Comment #10 from bin.cheng amker.cheng at gmail dot com ---
(In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #9)
BTW, the patch can hardly regress anything, it only affects cases that ICEd
before the patch.
Em, I am worried if vectorization can
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59519
--- Comment #11 from Jakub Jelinek jakub at gcc dot gnu.org ---
I've tried even:
struct S { int f0; } d;
int a[8] = { 0 }, b, c, e, f;
void
foo (void)
{
for (; e 1; e++)
{
for (b = 0; b 7; b++)
{
c |= (a[b + 1] !=
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59519
--- Comment #12 from Jakub Jelinek jakub at gcc dot gnu.org ---
--target_board=unix/-O3 testing showed no changes (except for the testcases in
the patch), on both x86_64-linux and i686-linux (on the former one including
ada testing).
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59519
--- Comment #6 from Jakub Jelinek jakub at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Created attachment 31562
-- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=31562action=edit
gcc49-pr59519.patch
I wonder if this isn't just a checking issue, the two PHI nodes
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59519
--- Comment #7 from bin.cheng amker.cheng at gmail dot com ---
(In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #6)
Created attachment 31562 [details]
gcc49-pr59519.patch
I wonder if this isn't just a checking issue, the two PHI nodes created in
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59519
--- Comment #5 from bin.cheng amker.cheng at gmail dot com ---
For the offending loop:
bb 5:
bb 6:
# b.4_30 = PHI b.4_12(5), 1(12)
# prephitmp_28 = PHI c.1_9(5), c.1_21(12)
# b_lsm.11_13 = PHI b.4_12(5), 1(12)
# ivtmp_46 = PHI
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59519
Jakub Jelinek jakub at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||amker at gcc dot
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59519
bin.cheng amker.cheng at gmail dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||amker.cheng at
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59519
--- Comment #4 from bin.cheng amker.cheng at gmail dot com ---
First clue.
b_lsm.11_13 is recognized as chrec {1, +, 1}_2 with the patch, thus the loop
can be vectorized now.
bb 5:
bb 6:
# b.4_30 = PHI b.4_12(5), 1(12)
# prephitmp_28 =
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59519
Marek Polacek mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P1
14 matches
Mail list logo
