Hi!
On 2025-01-20T08:40:25+0000, Tamar Christina <tamar.christ...@arm.com> wrote:
>> From: Thomas Schwinge <tho...@schwinge.name>
>> Sent: Monday, January 13, 2025 9:54 AM
>> On 2025-01-10T21:22:03+0000, Tamar Christina via Gcc-cvs <gcc-
>> c...@gcc.gnu.org> wrote:
>> > https://gcc.gnu.org/g:68326d5d1a593dc0bf098c03aac25916168bc5a9
>> >
>> > commit r15-6807-g68326d5d1a593dc0bf098c03aac25916168bc5a9
>> > Author: Alex Coplan <alex.cop...@arm.com>
>> > Date: Mon Mar 11 13:09:10 2024 +0000
>> >
>> > vect: Force alignment peeling to vectorize more early break loops
>> > [PR118211]
>>
>> In addition to the regression already noted elsewhere:
>>
>> PASS: gcc.dg/tree-ssa/predcom-8.c (test for excess errors)
>> PASS: gcc.dg/tree-ssa/predcom-8.c scan-tree-dump pcom "Executing
>> predictive commoning without unrolling"
>> [-PASS:-]{+FAIL:+} gcc.dg/tree-ssa/predcom-8.c scan-tree-dump-not pcom
>> "Invalid sum"
>>
>> ..., this commit for for '--target=amdgcn-amdhsa' (tested '-march=gfx908',
>> '-march=gfx1100') also regresses:
>>
>> PASS: gcc.dg/vect/vect-switch-search-line-fast.c (test for excess errors)
>> [-XFAIL:-]{+FAIL:+} gcc.dg/vect/vect-switch-search-line-fast.c
>> scan-tree-dump-times vect "vectorized 1 loops" [-1-]{+0+}
>>
>> gcc.dg/vect/vect-switch-search-line-fast.c: pattern found 1 times
>>
>> > --- a/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/vect/vect-switch-search-line-fast.c
>> > +++ b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/vect/vect-switch-search-line-fast.c
>> > [...]
>> > -/* { dg-final { scan-tree-dump-times "vectorized 1 loops" 1 "vect" {
>> > xfail *-*-* } } } */
>> > +/* { dg-final { scan-tree-dump-times "vectorized 1 loops" 1 "vect" {
>> > target { ilp32 } } } } */
>> > +/* { dg-final { scan-tree-dump-times "vectorized 1 loops" 0 "vect" {
>> > target { ! ilp32 } } } } */
>>
>> Presuming that it's correct that GCN continues to be able vectorize this,
>> what is the appropriate conditional to use?
>
> I don't think we really have a condition for it's succeeding on some targets
> for now.
Thanks for checking.
> The original testcase was xfail but it was failing for many different reasons
> on all targets.
Eh, of course -- it was XFAIL before, sorry. So, it's not the case that
"GCN continues to be able vectorize this", but rather that after this
commit, "GCN is now able vectorize this". :-)
> So I think just doing { target { ilp32 || { amdgcn-* } } } should work for
> now.
Pushed to trunk branch commit da75309c635c54a6010b146514d456d2a4c6ab33
"vect: Force alignment peeling to vectorize more early break loops [PR118211]:
update 'gcc.dg/vect/vect-switch-search-line-fast.c' for GCN",
see attached.
Grüße
Thomas
>From da75309c635c54a6010b146514d456d2a4c6ab33 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Thomas Schwinge <tschwi...@baylibre.com>
Date: Tue, 21 Jan 2025 14:57:37 +0100
Subject: [PATCH] vect: Force alignment peeling to vectorize more early break
loops [PR118211]: update 'gcc.dg/vect/vect-switch-search-line-fast.c' for GCN
PR tree-optimization/118211
PR tree-optimization/116126
gcc/testsuite/
* gcc.dg/vect/vect-switch-search-line-fast.c: Update for GCN.
---
gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/vect/vect-switch-search-line-fast.c | 4 ++--
1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
diff --git a/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/vect/vect-switch-search-line-fast.c b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/vect/vect-switch-search-line-fast.c
index 21c77f49ebd..678512db319 100644
--- a/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/vect/vect-switch-search-line-fast.c
+++ b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/vect/vect-switch-search-line-fast.c
@@ -16,5 +16,5 @@ const unsigned char *search_line_fast2 (const unsigned char *s,
return s;
}
-/* { dg-final { scan-tree-dump-times "vectorized 1 loops" 1 "vect" { target { ilp32 } } } } */
-/* { dg-final { scan-tree-dump-times "vectorized 1 loops" 0 "vect" { target { ! ilp32 } } } } */
+/* { dg-final { scan-tree-dump-times "vectorized 1 loops" 1 "vect" { target { ilp32 || { amdgcn*-*-* } } } } } */
+/* { dg-final { scan-tree-dump-times "vectorized 1 loops" 0 "vect" { target { ! { ilp32 || { amdgcn*-*-* } } } } } } */
--
2.34.1
