[Bug testsuite/44325] [4.6 regression] FAIL: gcc.dg/vect/vect-109.c

[rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org]

--- Comment #6 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org  2010-07-10 21:39 ---
Fixed.


-- 

rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
 Resolution||FIXED


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44325

[Bug testsuite/44325] [4.6 regression] FAIL: gcc.dg/vect/vect-109.c

[rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org]

--- Comment #5 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org  2010-07-10 21:38 ---
Subject: Bug 44325

Author: rguenth
Date: Sat Jul 10 21:38:32 2010
New Revision: 162044

URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=162044
Log:
2010-07-10  Mikael Pettersson  

PR testsuite/44325
Backport from mainline
2010-07-04  Ira Rosen  
Revital Eres  

* gcc.dg/vect/vect-109.c: Expect vectorization only on targets that
support misaligned stores.

Modified:
branches/gcc-4_5-branch/gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog
branches/gcc-4_5-branch/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/vect/vect-109.c


-- 


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44325

[Bug testsuite/44325] [4.6 regression] FAIL: gcc.dg/vect/vect-109.c

[mikpe at it dot uu dot se]

--- Comment #4 from mikpe at it dot uu dot se  2010-07-10 21:10 ---
This is fixed on trunk since r161797.  However, this is now a 4.5 regression. 
A patch to backport the fix to 4.5 has been posted:
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2010-07/msg00877.html


-- 


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44325

[Bug testsuite/44325] [4.6 regression] FAIL: gcc.dg/vect/vect-109.c

[mikpe at it dot uu dot se]

--- Comment #3 from mikpe at it dot uu dot se  2010-07-10 10:30 ---
It now also fails with 4.5 branch on sparc64-linux, with identical
-fdump-tree-vect-details as for powerpc64.  With 4.6 it fails on ARM with
identical reason since 20100529.

I'm thinking this hunk in the PR44284 fix is to blame:

--- trunk/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/vect/vect-109.c  2010/05/27 12:08:51 159919
+++ trunk/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/vect/vect-109.c  2010/05/27 13:23:45 159920
@@ -72,7 +72,7 @@
   return 0;
 }

-/* { dg-final { scan-tree-dump-times "vectorized 0 loops" 2 "vect" } } */
+/* { dg-final { scan-tree-dump-times "vectorized 1 loops" 2 "vect" } } */
 /* { dg-final { scan-tree-dump-times "not vectorized: unsupported unaligned
store" 2 "vect" { xfail vect_hw_misalign } } } */
 /* { dg-final { scan-tree-dump-times "Vectorizing an unaligned access" 10
"vect" { target vect_hw_misalign } } } */
 /* { dg-final { cleanup-tree-dump "vect" } } */

That is, the changed expectation that vectorization now will succeed should
probably depend on target vect_hw_misalign.


-- 


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44325

[Bug testsuite/44325] [4.6 regression] FAIL: gcc.dg/vect/vect-109.c

[mikpe at it dot uu dot se]

--- Comment #2 from mikpe at it dot uu dot se  2010-07-10 10:06 ---
This test now also fails with 4.5 branch on powerpc64.  It's a recent
regression, introduced somewhere between 20100701 and 20100708.

The -fdump-tree-vect-details file shows:

> fgrep vectorized vect-109.c.110t.vect 
vect-109.c:33: note: not vectorized: control flow in loop.
vect-109.c:26: note: === vect_mark_stmts_to_be_vectorized ===
vect-109.c:26: note: not vectorized: unsupported unaligned store.
vect-109.c:20: note: vectorized 0 loops in function.
vect-109.c:55: note: not vectorized: control flow in loop.
vect-109.c:48: note: === vect_mark_stmts_to_be_vectorized ===
vect-109.c:48: note: not vectorized: unsupported unaligned store.
vect-109.c:42: note: vectorized 0 loops in function.

so it's not the common problem with too many vectorized loops.

I'll try reverting the PR44284 backport.


-- 

mikpe at it dot uu dot se changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 CC||mikpe at it dot uu dot se


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44325