https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119103
--- Comment #16 from Niklas Haas ---
(In reply to Alexander Monakov from comment #15)
> (In reply to Niklas Haas from comment #12)
> > Out of curiosity, is there a work-around that I could use to get current
> > versions of GCC to compile the ri
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119103
Alexander Monakov changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||amonakov at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Com
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119103
--- Comment #14 from Jakub Jelinek ---
(In reply to Richard Biener from comment #10)
> (In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #9)
> > Shouldn't we optimize this in match.pd when global range says it is ok or
> > during vrp/evrp using local rang
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119103
--- Comment #13 from Richard Biener ---
(In reply to Niklas Haas from comment #12)
> Out of curiosity, is there a work-around that I could use to get current
> versions of GCC to compile the right thing, but without breaking
> cross-platform com
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119103
--- Comment #12 from Niklas Haas ---
Out of curiosity, is there a work-around that I could use to get current
versions of GCC to compile the right thing, but without breaking cross-platform
compatibility?
I did try replacing the assertion by "x
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119103
--- Comment #11 from Richard Biener ---
Created attachment 60648
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=60648&action=edit
patch
I'm testing this for GCC 16.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119103
--- Comment #10 from Richard Biener ---
(In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #9)
> Shouldn't we optimize this in match.pd when global range says it is ok or
> during vrp/evrp using local ranges? I mean turn the int shift into
> {,un}signed {
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119103
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #9
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119103
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119103
--- Comment #7 from Richard Biener ---
So first of all the range info on the shift is lost, so
vect_recog_over_widening_pattern cannot do its work. The info is lost when
PRE moves the invariant (int) amount cast out of the loop - we've dropped
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119103
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Blocks||53947
Target|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119103
--- Comment #5 from Hongtao Liu ---
(In reply to Hongtao Liu from comment #4)
> vect_recog_over_widening_pattern could be extended with range info for this?
Looks like vectorizer already have range_info from
vect_determine_precisions_from_range
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119103
Hongtao Liu changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||liuhongt at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119103
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|Very suboptimal AVX2 code |shift not demotated when
14 matches
Mail list logo
