https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82604
--- Comment #17 from rguenther at suse dot de <rguenther at suse dot de> --- On Thu, 18 Jan 2018, amker at gcc dot gnu.org wrote: > https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82604 > > --- Comment #16 from amker at gcc dot gnu.org --- > I hope it's possible to break the dependence by reordering passes so that > graphite/parallelization could be moved earlier. There are several issues > like > this IIRC. Certainly not for GCC 8. Also given that parallelization involves outlining of code this always introduces issues with dependence analysis due to extra indirections and us not being able to transition all relevant information to the outlined copy. So I'd even move it later... (after vectorization for example). For this particular case dependence analysis should be enhanced to also handle memory builtins of course.
