Re: [PATCH][RFC] Remove ifcvt_repair_bool_pattern, re-do bool patterns

2016-06-01 Thread Richard Biener
On Tue, 31 May 2016, Yuri Rumyantsev wrote: > Richard, > > I built compiler with your patch and did not find out any issues with > vectorization of loops marked with pragma simd. I also noticed that > the size of the vectorized loop looks smaller (I can't tell you exact > numbers since the fresh

Re: [PATCH][RFC] Remove ifcvt_repair_bool_pattern, re-do bool patterns

2016-05-31 Thread Yuri Rumyantsev
Richard, I built compiler with your patch and did not find out any issues with vectorization of loops marked with pragma simd. I also noticed that the size of the vectorized loop looks smaller (I can't tell you exact numbers since the fresh compiler performs fool unroll even if "-funroll-loops" op

Re: [PATCH][RFC] Remove ifcvt_repair_bool_pattern, re-do bool patterns

2016-05-30 Thread Ilya Enkovich
2016-05-30 14:04 GMT+03:00 Richard Biener : > > The following patch removes the restriction on seeing a tree of stmts > in vectorizer bool pattern detection (aka single-use). With this > it is no longer necessary to unshare DEFs in ifcvt_repair_bool_pattern > and that compile-time hog can go (it's

[PATCH][RFC] Remove ifcvt_repair_bool_pattern, re-do bool patterns

2016-05-30 Thread Richard Biener
The following patch removes the restriction on seeing a tree of stmts in vectorizer bool pattern detection (aka single-use). With this it is no longer necessary to unshare DEFs in ifcvt_repair_bool_pattern and that compile-time hog can go (it's now enabled unconditionally for GCC 7). Instead the