https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99971
--- Comment #11 from rguenther at suse dot de ---
On Fri, 23 Apr 2021, andysem at mail dot ru wrote:
> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99971
>
> --- Comment #10 from andysem at mail dot ru ---
> Thanks. Will this be backported to
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99971
--- Comment #10 from andysem at mail dot ru ---
Thanks. Will this be backported to 10 and 11 branches?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99971
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99971
--- Comment #8 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Richard Biener :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:700e542971251b11623cce877075567815f72965
commit r12-79-g700e542971251b11623cce877075567815f72965
Author: Richard Biener
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99971
Dávid Bolvanský changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||david.bolvansky at gmail dot
com
---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99971
--- Comment #6 from andysem at mail dot ru ---
Hmm, it looks like the original code has changed enough so that the problem no
longer reproduces, with or without __restrict__. I don't have the older version
of the code, so I can't tell what
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99971
--- Comment #5 from Richard Biener ---
(In reply to Richard Biener from comment #4)
> (In reply to andysem from comment #3)
> > I tried adding __restrict__ to the equivalents of x, y1 and y2 in the
> > original larger code base and it didn't
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99971
--- Comment #4 from Richard Biener ---
(In reply to andysem from comment #3)
> I tried adding __restrict__ to the equivalents of x, y1 and y2 in the
> original larger code base and it didn't help. The compiler (gcc 10.2) would
> still generate
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99971
--- Comment #3 from andysem at mail dot ru ---
I tried adding __restrict__ to the equivalents of x, y1 and y2 in the original
larger code base and it didn't help. The compiler (gcc 10.2) would still
generate the same half-vectorized code.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99971
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||missed-optimization
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99971
--- Comment #1 from andysem at mail dot ru ---
For reference, an ideal version of this code should look something like this:
test(A&, A const&, A const&):
movdqu (%rsi), %xmm0
movdqu (%rdi), %xmm1
movdqu (%rdx), %xmm2
11 matches
Mail list logo