From: Pan Li
This patch would like to XFAIL the test case pr30957-1.c for the RVV when
build the elf with some configurations (list at the end of the log)
It will be vectorized during vect_transform_loop with a variable factor.
It won't benefit from unrolling/peeling and mark the loop->unroll as
On 12/26/23 02:34, pan2...@intel.com wrote:
From: Pan Li
This patch would like to XFAIL the test case pr30957-1.c for the RVV when
build the elf with some configurations (list at the end of the log)
It will be vectorized during vect_transform_loop with a variable factor.
It won't benefit fro
d.
Sure, will have a try for making the -0.0 happen in aarch64.
Pan
-Original Message-
From: Jeff Law
Sent: Friday, December 29, 2023 12:39 AM
To: Li, Pan2 ; gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
Cc: juzhe.zh...@rivai.ai; Wang, Yanzhang ;
kito.ch...@gmail.com; richard.guent...@gmail.com
Subject: Re
On 12/28/23 17:42, Li, Pan2 wrote:
Thanks Jeff for comments, and Happy new year!
Interesting. So I'd actually peel one more layer off this onion. Why
do the aarch64 and riscv targets generate different constants (0.0 vs
-0.0)?
Yeah, it surprise me too when debugging the foo function. But
: juzhe.zh...@rivai.ai; Wang, Yanzhang ;
kito.ch...@gmail.com; richard.guent...@gmail.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] RISC-V: XFAIL pr30957-1.c when loop vectorized with
variable factor
On 12/28/23 17:42, Li, Pan2 wrote:
> Thanks Jeff for comments, and Happy new year!
>
>> Interesting. So I'
On 12/28/23 22:56, Li, Pan2 wrote:
Thanks Jeff.
I think I locate where aarch64 performs the trick here.
1. In the .final we have rtl like
(insn:TI 6 8 29 (set (reg:SF 32 v0)
(const_double:SF -0.0 [-0x0.0p+0]))
"/home/box/panli/gnu-toolchain/gcc/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/pr30957-1.c":31
11:14 AM
To: Li, Pan2 ; gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
Cc: juzhe.zh...@rivai.ai; Wang, Yanzhang ;
kito.ch...@gmail.com; richard.guent...@gmail.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] RISC-V: XFAIL pr30957-1.c when loop vectorized with
variable factor
On 12/28/23 22:56, Li, Pan2 wrote:
> Thanks Jeff.
>
&g
