On Sat, May 30, 2015 at 7:47 AM, Jeff Law l...@redhat.com wrote:
On 05/19/2015 10:12 AM, Aditya K wrote:
w.r.t. the PR48052, here is the patch which finds out if scev would wrap
or not.
The patch symbolically evaluates if valid_niter= loop-nb_iterations is
true. In that case the scev would
On Mon, Jun 1, 2015 at 4:00 PM, Richard Biener
richard.guent...@gmail.com wrote:
On Sat, May 30, 2015 at 7:47 AM, Jeff Law l...@redhat.com wrote:
On 05/19/2015 10:12 AM, Aditya K wrote:
w.r.t. the PR48052, here is the patch which finds out if scev would wrap
or not.
The patch symbolically
On 05/19/2015 10:12 AM, Aditya K wrote:
w.r.t. the PR48052, here is the patch which finds out if scev would wrap or not.
The patch symbolically evaluates if valid_niter= loop-nb_iterations is true.
In that case the scev would not wrap (??).
Currently, we only look for two special 'patterns',
I tested this patch and it passes bootstrap and no extra failures.
Thanks
-Aditya
Symbolically evaluate conditionals, and subtraction when additional constraints
are provided.
Adding this evaluation mechanism helps vectorize some loops on 64bit machines
because on 64bit, a typecast appears
On Wed, May 6, 2015 at 7:02 PM, Richard Biener
richard.guent...@gmail.com wrote:
On Mon, May 4, 2015 at 9:47 PM, Abderrazek Zaafrani
az.zaafr...@gmail.com wrote:
This is an old thread and we are still running into similar issues:
Code is not being vectorized on 64-bit target due to scev not
w.r.t. the PR48052, here is the patch which finds out if scev would wrap or not.
The patch symbolically evaluates if valid_niter= loop-nb_iterations is true.
In that case the scev would not wrap (??).
Currently, we only look for two special 'patterns', which are sufficient to
analyze the simple
Richard,
Agree that the code is handling a very special case but this special
case is common enough and is limiting the vectorizer in a significant
way. The special case is: loops with unsigned index, non-constant
start value, and step 1. We have a code for a matrix multiply – loops
blocked by
On Mon, May 4, 2015 at 9:47 PM, Abderrazek Zaafrani
az.zaafr...@gmail.com wrote:
This is an old thread and we are still running into similar issues:
Code is not being vectorized on 64-bit target due to scev not being
able to optimally analyze overflow condition.
While the original test case
This is an old thread and we are still running into similar issues:
Code is not being vectorized on 64-bit target due to scev not being
able to optimally analyze overflow condition.
While the original test case shown here seems to work now, it does not
work if the start value is not a constant
