[Bug tree-optimization/79460] gcc fails to optimise out a trivial additive loop for seemingly arbitrary numbers of iterations

2017-02-14 Thread segher at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79460 --- Comment #12 from Segher Boessenkool --- (In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #7) > Shouldn't it (both in the vectorizer and in scev) be dependent not just on > flag_fp_contract_mode but also on some -ffast-math subflag? Doing several >

[Bug tree-optimization/79460] gcc fails to optimise out a trivial additive loop for seemingly arbitrary numbers of iterations

2017-02-14 Thread rguenther at suse dot de
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79460 --- Comment #11 from rguenther at suse dot de --- On Tue, 14 Feb 2017, amker at gcc dot gnu.org wrote: > https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79460 > > --- Comment #10 from amker at gcc dot gnu.org --- > (In reply to Jakub Jelinek from

[Bug tree-optimization/79460] gcc fails to optimise out a trivial additive loop for seemingly arbitrary numbers of iterations

2017-02-14 Thread amker at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79460 --- Comment #10 from amker at gcc dot gnu.org --- (In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #9) > (In reply to rguent...@suse.de from comment #8) > > On Tue, 14 Feb 2017, jakub at gcc dot gnu.org wrote: > > > > >

[Bug tree-optimization/79460] gcc fails to optimise out a trivial additive loop for seemingly arbitrary numbers of iterations

2017-02-14 Thread jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79460 --- Comment #9 from Jakub Jelinek --- (In reply to rguent...@suse.de from comment #8) > On Tue, 14 Feb 2017, jakub at gcc dot gnu.org wrote: > > > https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79460 > > > > --- Comment #7 from Jakub Jelinek

[Bug tree-optimization/79460] gcc fails to optimise out a trivial additive loop for seemingly arbitrary numbers of iterations

2017-02-14 Thread rguenther at suse dot de
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79460 --- Comment #8 from rguenther at suse dot de --- On Tue, 14 Feb 2017, jakub at gcc dot gnu.org wrote: > https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79460 > > --- Comment #7 from Jakub Jelinek --- > Shouldn't it (both in the vectorizer and in

[Bug tree-optimization/79460] gcc fails to optimise out a trivial additive loop for seemingly arbitrary numbers of iterations

2017-02-14 Thread jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79460 --- Comment #7 from Jakub Jelinek --- Shouldn't it (both in the vectorizer and in scev) be dependent not just on flag_fp_contract_mode but also on some -ffast-math subflag? Doing several additions can e.g. raise different exceptions and have

[Bug tree-optimization/79460] gcc fails to optimise out a trivial additive loop for seemingly arbitrary numbers of iterations

2017-02-14 Thread rguenther at suse dot de
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79460 --- Comment #6 from rguenther at suse dot de --- On Mon, 13 Feb 2017, amker at gcc dot gnu.org wrote: > https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79460 > > --- Comment #5 from amker at gcc dot gnu.org --- > (In reply to Jakub Jelinek from

[Bug tree-optimization/79460] gcc fails to optimise out a trivial additive loop for seemingly arbitrary numbers of iterations

2017-02-13 Thread amker at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79460 --- Comment #5 from amker at gcc dot gnu.org --- (In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #4) > (In reply to Richard Biener from comment #3) > > In this case it is complete unrolling that can estimate the non-vector code > > to constant fold but

[Bug tree-optimization/79460] gcc fails to optimise out a trivial additive loop for seemingly arbitrary numbers of iterations

2017-02-13 Thread jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79460 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment #4

[Bug tree-optimization/79460] gcc fails to optimise out a trivial additive loop for seemingly arbitrary numbers of iterations

2017-02-13 Thread rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79460 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED Assignee|unassigned

[Bug tree-optimization/79460] gcc fails to optimise out a trivial additive loop for seemingly arbitrary numbers of iterations

2017-02-12 Thread amker at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79460 amker at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added CC||amker at gcc dot gnu.org ---

[Bug tree-optimization/79460] gcc fails to optimise out a trivial additive loop for seemingly arbitrary numbers of iterations

2017-02-12 Thread drraph at gmail dot com
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79460 --- Comment #1 from Raphael C --- After some experimentation (also carried out by Hagen von Eitzen), it seems that any limit of at least 72 which is also a multiple of 4 causes the same optimisation problem. That is the loop is *not* optimised

[Bug tree-optimization/79460] gcc fails to optimise out a trivial additive loop for seemingly arbitrary numbers of iterations

2017-02-11 Thread segher at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79460 Segher Boessenkool changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Last reconfirmed|