https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114435
--- Comment #10 from Richard Biener ---
(In reply to Richard Biener from comment #9)
> So the "pcom messes up SLP" part should be fixed now. The pass dependence
> of invariant/store motion and unswitching (and likely also loop splitting) is
> s
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114435
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|ASSIGNED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114435
--- Comment #8 from GCC Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Richard Biener :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:1065a7db6f2a69770a85b4d53b9123b090dd1771
commit r15-895-g1065a7db6f2a69770a85b4d53b9123b090dd1771
Author: Richard Biener
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114435
--- Comment #7 from Richard Biener ---
Ah, the missed store motion is because of the IS_NAN (k) check which
makes the memory accesses only conditional executed and thus possibly
trap. We "fix" that only during loop unswitching which hoists the
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114435
--- Comment #6 from Richard Biener ---
(In reply to jchrist from comment #5)
> I tried your patch and it leaves an awful amount of dead stores to the
> accumulator within the loop. I also still see the stores inside the loop in
> gimple. Is th
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114435
--- Comment #5 from jchrist at linux dot ibm.com ---
I tried your patch and it leaves an awful amount of dead stores to the
accumulator within the loop. I also still see the stores inside the loop in
gimple. Is this really desired? Or is this
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114435
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114435
--- Comment #3 from Richard Biener ---
Looking again the reason for the "bad" vectorization with pcom applied is
t.c:23:23: missed: Build SLP failed: operation unsupported _51 =
r__r0_lsm0.7_7;
that is, pcom leaves around SSA name copies whi
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114435
--- Comment #2 from jchrist at linux dot ibm.com ---
I tried this, but it seems like pcom does not handle vectors at all: In the
gimple input I have
vectp.5_32 = r_26(D);
# VUSE <.MEM_52>
vect__51.6_1 = MEM [(doubleD.32 *)vectp.5_32];
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114435
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
Last reco
10 matches
Mail list logo
