On Thu, Dec 10, 2015 at 8:33 PM, David Edelsohn <dje....@gmail.com> wrote: > On Thu, Dec 10, 2015 at 2:23 PM, Bill Schmidt > <wschm...@linux.vnet.ibm.com> wrote: >> Hi, >> >> The subject test case has been failing as follows: >> >> FAIL: gcc.dg/vect/costmodel/ppc/costmodel-fast-math-vect-pr29925.c >> scan-tree-dump-times vect "vectorization not profitable" 1 >> >> The test has been failing since r223528, which is: >> >> 2015-05-22 Richard Biener <rguent...@suse.de> >> >> PR tree-optimization/65701 >> * tree-vect-data-refs.c (vect_enhance_data_refs_alignment): >> Move peeling cost models into one place. Peel for alignment >> for single loads only if an aligned load is cheaper than >> an unaligned load. >> >> Thus with that modification, gcc now vectorizes the loop that was >> previously deemed unprofitable to vectorize. As a result, the test case >> no longer has any reason to exist, and I would like to delete it.
Just curious - why was it not profitable before but is now? The only thing that has changed is we no longer require peeling for gaps(?) Thus, did you check with -fno-vect-cost-model before/after the rev.? We might also do outer loop vectorization if the inner loop is not unrolled? Richard. >> Ok for trunk? >> >> Thanks, >> Bill >> >> >> [gcc/testsuite] >> >> 2015-12-10 Bill Schmidt <wschm...@linux.vnet.ibm.com> >> >> * gcc.dg/vect/costmodel/ppc/costmodel-fast-math-vect-pr29925.c: >> Delete. > > Okay with me. > > Thanks, David
