[Bug tree-optimization/20122] Wrong code with gcc 4.0 tree-vectorizer

2005-05-02 Thread micis at gmx dot de 

--- Additional Comments From micis at gmx dot de  2005-05-02 11:58 ---
The patch given in comment #5 seems to be included in gcc400 and in mainline.
I think this PR should be closed.

Michael Cieslinski


-- 
   What|Removed |Added

 Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
 Resolution||FIXED


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=20122

[Bug tree-optimization/20122] Wrong code with gcc 4.0 tree-vectorizer

2005-05-02 Thread pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 


-- 
   What|Removed |Added

   Target Milestone|--- |4.0.0


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=20122

[Bug tree-optimization/20122] Wrong code with gcc 4.0 tree-vectorizer

2005-02-21 Thread pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 

--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org  2005-02-21 
18:49 ---
I think this is related to PR 19716.  Note the tree level looks correct to me.

-- 


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=20122

[Bug tree-optimization/20122] Wrong code with gcc 4.0 tree-vectorizer

2005-02-24 Thread irar at il dot ibm dot com 

--- Additional Comments From irar at il dot ibm dot com  2005-02-24 13:41 
---
I found the problem that causes this. I'll send the patch next week.
Ira

-- 


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=20122

[Bug tree-optimization/20122] Wrong code with gcc 4.0 tree-vectorizer

2005-03-02 Thread micis at gmx dot de 

--- Additional Comments From micis at gmx dot de  2005-03-02 10:27 ---
After you found the problem, may I ask you to set the status NEW and target 
milestone to 4.0.0 ?
That way this bug would show up in the list of open bugs for gcc40. 

Michael Cieslinski


-- 


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=20122

[Bug tree-optimization/20122] Wrong code with gcc 4.0 tree-vectorizer

2005-03-02 Thread giovannibajo at libero dot it 

--- Additional Comments From giovannibajo at libero dot it  2005-03-02 
11:42 ---
Ira, can you please remember to confirm bugs in Bugzilla when you find them?

Micheal, this bug cannot be fixed in 4.0 since it is not a regression (the 
vectorizer is new). I would argue in favor of a new rule that allows to fix 
bugs in release branches for new features which are disabled by default, but 
for now this bug won't have a 4.0 milestone.

-- 
   What|Removed |Added

 CC||irar at il dot ibm dot com
 Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
 Ever Confirmed||1
   Last reconfirmed|-00-00 00:00:00 |2005-03-02 11:42:36
   date||


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=20122

[Bug tree-optimization/20122] Wrong code with gcc 4.0 tree-vectorizer

2005-03-02 Thread irar at il dot ibm dot com 


-- 
   What|Removed |Added

 AssignedTo|unassigned at gcc dot gnu   |irar at il dot ibm dot com
   |dot org |
 Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
   Last reconfirmed|2005-03-02 11:42:36 |2005-03-02 12:43:57
   date||


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=20122

[Bug tree-optimization/20122] Wrong code with gcc 4.0 tree-vectorizer

2005-03-02 Thread irar at il dot ibm dot com 

--- Additional Comments From irar at il dot ibm dot com  2005-03-02 12:45 
---
Fixed in http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2005-02/msg01788.html. Waiting for 
review.

-- 


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=20122

[Bug tree-optimization/20122] Wrong code with gcc 4.0 tree-vectorizer

2005-03-03 Thread micis at gmx dot de 

--- Additional Comments From micis at gmx dot de  2005-03-03 10:44 ---
I applied you patch and did a full bootstrap on x86_64.
No new regressions. 
It fixes my problem.

Michael Cieslinski


-- 


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=20122