Hi Alexandre,
on 2023/4/7 12:37, Alexandre Oliva wrote:
> On Apr 6, 2023, "Kewen.Lin" wrote:
>
>> on 2023/4/6 13:20, Alexandre Oliva wrote:
>>> I confirm I observe the problem with gcc-12 targeting ppc64-vx7r2,
>>> containing the backported patch, and that the loop is vectorized,
>>> failing th
On Apr 6, 2023, "Kewen.Lin" wrote:
> on 2023/4/6 13:20, Alexandre Oliva wrote:
>> I confirm I observe the problem with gcc-12 targeting ppc64-vx7r2,
>> containing the backported patch, and that the loop is vectorized,
>> failing the test.
I take that back. My notes indicate I looked into this
Hi Alexandre,
on 2023/4/6 13:20, Alexandre Oliva wrote:
> Hello, Kewen,
>
> On Mar 27, 2023, "Kewen.Lin" wrote:
>
>> on 2023/3/25 16:35, Alexandre Oliva wrote:
>
>>> The first loop in main gets stores "vectorized" on powerpc into
>>> full-word stores, even without any vector instruction suppor
Hello, Kewen,
On Mar 27, 2023, "Kewen.Lin" wrote:
> on 2023/3/25 16:35, Alexandre Oliva wrote:
>> The first loop in main gets stores "vectorized" on powerpc into
>> full-word stores, even without any vector instruction support, so the
>> test's expectation of no loop vectorization is not met.
Hi Alexandre,
on 2023/3/25 16:35, Alexandre Oliva wrote:
>
> The first loop in main gets stores "vectorized" on powerpc into
> full-word stores, even without any vector instruction support, so the
> test's expectation of no loop vectorization is not met.
>
I think this test issue has been gone
The first loop in main gets stores "vectorized" on powerpc into
full-word stores, even without any vector instruction support, so the
test's expectation of no loop vectorization is not met.
Regstrapped on ppc64-linux-gnu. Also tested with ppc64-vxworks7r2
(gcc-12). Ok to install?
for gcc/te
