https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119224
--- Comment #6 from Vineet Gupta <vineetg at gcc dot gnu.org> --- (In reply to Robin Dapp from comment #2) > I'm afraid that's due to scheduling (and not RA spilling). Of course there > shouldn't be any vector stores in this loop and with -fno-schedule-insns > there aren't any. > > It's much worse for zvl128b even. While the 5 or so stores with zvl256b > might be an acceptable tradeoff the zvl128b code certainly isn't. FWIW my sched1 patch [1] which couldn't make it fixes this, need to revisit that. [1] https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2024-October/665946.html
