OK. will add it later. Replied Message FromRobin DappDate12/13/2023 20:23 Tojuzhe.zhong Ccrdapp@gmail.com,gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org,kito.ch...@gmail.com,kito.ch...@sifive.com,jeffreya...@gmail.comSubjectRe: [PATCH] RISC-V: Postpone full available optimization [VSETVL PASS]> Do you m
> Do you mean add some comments in tests？
I meant add it as a run test as well and comment that the test
has caused out-of-bounds writes before and passed by the time of
adding it (or so) and is kept regardless.
Regards
Robin
Do you mean add some comments in tests？ Replied Message FromRobin DappDate12/13/2023 20:16 Tojuzhe.zhong Ccrdapp@gmail.com,gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org,kito.ch...@gmail.com,kito.ch...@sifive.com,jeffreya...@gmail.comSubjectRe: [PATCH] RISC-V: Postpone full available optimization [VSETVL
> I don”t choose to run since I didn”t have issue run on my local
> simulator no matter qemu or spike.
Yes it was flaky. That's kind of expected with the out-of-bounds
writes we did. They can depend on runtime environment and other
factors. Of course it's a bit counterintuitive to add a (befo
ToJuzhe-Zhong,gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org Ccrdapp@gmail.com,kito.ch...@gmail.com,kito.ch...@sifive.com,jeffreya...@gmail.comSubjectRe: [PATCH] RISC-V: Postpone full available optimization [VSETVL PASS]Hi Juzhe,
in general looks OK to me.
Just a question for understanding:
> -
Hi Juzhe,
in general looks OK to me.
Just a question for understanding:
> - if (header_info.valid_p ()
> - && (anticipated_exp_p (header_info) || block_info.full_available))
Why is full_available true if we cannot use it?
> +/* { dg-do compile } */
It would be nice if we could make
Fix VSETVL BUG that AVL is polluted
.L15:
li a3,9
lui a4,%hi(s)
sw a3,%lo(j)(t2)
sh a5,%lo(s)(a4) <--a4 is hold the address of s
beq t0,zero,.L42
sw t5,8(t4)
vsetvli zero,a4,e8,m8,ta,ma <<--- a4 as avl
Actually,
