https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70012
Bill Schmidt changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70012
--- Comment #7 from Bill Schmidt ---
Author: wschmidt
Date: Wed Feb 1 22:11:57 2017
New Revision: 245108
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=245108&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2017-02-01 Bill Schmidt
PR target/70012
* gcc.dg/vec
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70012
--- Comment #6 from Bill Schmidt ---
(In reply to Iain Sandoe from comment #5)
> (In reply to Bill Schmidt from comment #4)
> > Created attachment 40568 [details]
> > Proposed patch
> >
> > Attaching proposed patch. Iain, would you be able to t
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70012
--- Comment #5 from Iain Sandoe ---
(In reply to Bill Schmidt from comment #4)
> Created attachment 40568 [details]
> Proposed patch
>
> Attaching proposed patch. Iain, would you be able to test this on Darwin
> 32- and 64-bit and see whether i
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70012
Bill Schmidt changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |wschmidt at gcc dot
gnu.org
--- C
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70012
--- Comment #3 from Bill Schmidt ---
It looks to me like vect_alignment_reachable is the wrong test to be using
here. This is equivalent to vect_aligned_arrays || natural_alignment_32.
vect_aligned_array is always 0 for powerpc*-*-*. natural_a
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70012
Bill Schmidt changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70012
--- Comment #1 from Richard Biener ---
Might be a testsuite artifact in not reaching the cost model check but
rejecting vectorization earlier (try bumping N to 32, after peeling for
alignment no
vectorized iteration would be left so we don't peel
