--- Comment #7 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-04-28 09:23 ---
Subject: Bug 34223
Author: rguenth
Date: Mon Apr 28 09:22:28 2008
New Revision: 134747
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=134747
Log:
2008-04-28 Richard Guenther [EMAIL PROTECTED]
PR
--- Comment #5 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-04-27 16:27 ---
Subject: Bug 34223
Author: rguenth
Date: Sun Apr 27 16:27:08 2008
New Revision: 134730
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=134730
Log:
2008-04-27 Richard Guenther [EMAIL PROTECTED]
PR
--- Comment #6 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-04-27 17:16 ---
Fixed.
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED
--- Comment #4 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-04-22 09:51 ---
Mine.
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #1 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-11-25 12:50 ---
Related to PR18754 - but vectorizer folks say early complete unrolling defeats
the vectorizer. So possibly a compromise is to do early complete unrolling
only
for nested loops.
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #2 from steven at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-11-25 13:36 ---
Why is this a shift not supported:
not vectorized: relevant stmt not supported: D.1652_13 = j_29 3
Is j_29*8 supported (i.e. if you hack this expression to turn it into a
MULT_EXPR), does the vectorizer work then??
--- Comment #3 from eres at il dot ibm dot com 2007-11-25 14:13 ---
(In reply to comment #2)
Why is this a shift not supported:
not vectorized: relevant stmt not supported: D.1652_13 = j_29 3
Is j_29*8 supported (i.e. if you hack this expression to turn it into a
MULT_EXPR), does
