[Bug target/56865] [4.9 regression] FAIL: gcc.dg/vect/vect-96.c scan-tree-dump-times vect "Alignment of access forced using peeling" 1

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56865 Bill Schmidt changed: What|Removed |Added Status|REOPENED|RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug target/56865] [4.9 regression] FAIL: gcc.dg/vect/vect-96.c scan-tree-dump-times vect "Alignment of access forced using peeling" 1

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56865 --- Comment #23 from Bill Schmidt --- (In reply to Bill Schmidt from comment #20) > (In reply to Richard Biener from comment #19) > > This may be now fixed ... > > I believe it is! Nice work. I don't see vect-96.c failing anymore on > r207423 o

[Bug target/56865] [4.9 regression] FAIL: gcc.dg/vect/vect-96.c scan-tree-dump-times vect "Alignment of access forced using peeling" 1

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56865 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment #22

[Bug target/56865] [4.9 regression] FAIL: gcc.dg/vect/vect-96.c scan-tree-dump-times vect "Alignment of access forced using peeling" 1

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56865 --- Comment #21 from rguenther at suse dot de --- On Mon, 3 Feb 2014, wschmidt at gcc dot gnu.org wrote: > http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56865 > > --- Comment #20 from Bill Schmidt --- > (In reply to Richard Biener from comment #1

[Bug target/56865] [4.9 regression] FAIL: gcc.dg/vect/vect-96.c scan-tree-dump-times vect "Alignment of access forced using peeling" 1

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56865 --- Comment #20 from Bill Schmidt --- (In reply to Richard Biener from comment #19) > This may be now fixed ... I believe it is! Nice work. I don't see vect-96.c failing anymore on r207423 of trunk. The last spectester result we have is from 1

[Bug target/56865] [4.9 regression] FAIL: gcc.dg/vect/vect-96.c scan-tree-dump-times vect "Alignment of access forced using peeling" 1

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56865 --- Comment #19 from Richard Biener --- This may be now fixed ...

[Bug target/56865] [4.9 regression] FAIL: gcc.dg/vect/vect-96.c scan-tree-dump-times vect "Alignment of access forced using peeling" 1

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56865 --- Comment #18 from Bill Schmidt --- spawn /home/wschmidt/gcc/build/gcc-mainline-test2/gcc/xgcc -B/home/wschmidt/gcc /build/gcc-mainline-test2/gcc/ /home/wschmidt/gcc/gcc-mainline-test2/gcc/testsu ite/gcc.dg/vect/vect-96.c -fno-diagnostics-show-c

[Bug target/56865] [4.9 regression] FAIL: gcc.dg/vect/vect-96.c scan-tree-dump-times vect "Alignment of access forced using peeling" 1

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56865 --- Comment #17 from Bill Schmidt --- Initial news is not good -- I am seeing a lot of ICEs go by as the testing proceeds, including in vect-96.c and vect-42.c.

[Bug target/56865] [4.9 regression] FAIL: gcc.dg/vect/vect-96.c scan-tree-dump-times vect "Alignment of access forced using peeling" 1

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56865 --- Comment #16 from Bill Schmidt --- Thanks, testing in progress.

[Bug target/56865] [4.9 regression] FAIL: gcc.dg/vect/vect-96.c scan-tree-dump-times vect "Alignment of access forced using peeling" 1

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56865 --- Comment #15 from Richard Biener --- Created attachment 31110 --> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=31110&action=edit revised patch Hmm, try this one.

[Bug target/56865] [4.9 regression] FAIL: gcc.dg/vect/vect-96.c scan-tree-dump-times vect "Alignment of access forced using peeling" 1

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56865 --- Comment #14 from Bill Schmidt --- Hi Richi, Passes bootstrap on powerpc64-unknown-linux-gnu and fixes this test, but breaks two others: 57,60c57,68 < FAIL: gcc.dg/vect/vect-96.c scan-tree-dump-times vect "Vectorizing an unaligned access" 1 <

[Bug target/56865] [4.9 regression] FAIL: gcc.dg/vect/vect-96.c scan-tree-dump-times vect "Alignment of access forced using peeling" 1

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56865 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Attachment #31103|0 |1 is obsolete|

[Bug target/56865] [4.9 regression] FAIL: gcc.dg/vect/vect-96.c scan-tree-dump-times vect "Alignment of access forced using peeling" 1

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56865 --- Comment #12 from rguenther at suse dot de --- On Tue, 29 Oct 2013, wschmidt at gcc dot gnu.org wrote: > http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56865 > > --- Comment #11 from Bill Schmidt --- > Thanks, Richi -- yes, I'll give this a try

[Bug target/56865] [4.9 regression] FAIL: gcc.dg/vect/vect-96.c scan-tree-dump-times vect "Alignment of access forced using peeling" 1

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56865 --- Comment #11 from Bill Schmidt --- Thanks, Richi -- yes, I'll give this a try later today (lots of meetings in the way but I'll get to it sooner or later). Bill

[Bug target/56865] [4.9 regression] FAIL: gcc.dg/vect/vect-96.c scan-tree-dump-times vect "Alignment of access forced using peeling" 1

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56865 --- Comment #10 from Richard Biener --- Created attachment 31103 --> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=31103&action=edit untested patch Patch I am testing on x86_64-linux - can you give ppc/ppc64 a try? This should make behavior in

[Bug target/56865] [4.9 regression] FAIL: gcc.dg/vect/vect-96.c scan-tree-dump-times vect "Alignment of access forced using peeling" 1

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56865 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Status|RESOLVED|REOPENED Resolution|FIXED