http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56865
Bill Schmidt <wschmidt at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
CC| |rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org,
| |wschmidt at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #2 from Bill Schmidt <wschmidt at gcc dot gnu.org> 2013-05-01
21:58:09 UTC ---
I've reproduced this as well. Additionally, gcc.dg/vect/vect-96.c fails
similarly. Both tests began failing at r196872:
2013-03-21 Richard Biener <rguent...@suse.de>
* tree-vect-data-refs.c (vect_update_interleaving_chain): Remove.
(vect_insert_into_interleaving_chain): Likewise.
(vect_drs_dependent_in_basic_block): Inline ...
(vect_slp_analyze_data_ref_dependence): ... here. New function,
split out from ...
(vect_analyze_data_ref_dependence): ... here. Simplify.
(vect_check_interleaving): Simplify.
(vect_analyze_data_ref_dependences): Likewise. Split out ...
(vect_slp_analyze_data_ref_dependences): ... this new function.
(dr_group_sort_cmp): New function.
(vect_analyze_data_ref_accesses): Compute data-reference groups
here instead of in vect_analyze_data_ref_dependence. Use
a more efficient algorithm.
* tree-vect-slp.c (vect_slp_analyze_bb_1): Use
vect_slp_analyze_data_ref_dependences. Call
vect_analyze_data_ref_accesses earlier.
* tree-vect-loop.c (vect_analyze_loop_2): Likewise.
* tree-vectorizer.h (vect_analyze_data_ref_dependences): Adjust.
(vect_slp_analyze_data_ref_dependences): New prototype.
Richi, I think this commit was not intended to have any functional effect -- is
that correct?
