On February 1, 2014 12:06:55 AM GMT+01:00, Cong Hou wrote:
>On Fri, Jan 31, 2014 at 5:06 AM, Jakub Jelinek
>wrote:
>>
>> On Fri, Jan 31, 2014 at 09:41:59AM +0100, Richard Biener wrote:
>> > Is that because si and pattern_def_si point to the same stmts?
>Then
>> > I'd prefer to do
>> >
>> > if
On Fri, Jan 31, 2014 at 5:06 AM, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
>
> On Fri, Jan 31, 2014 at 09:41:59AM +0100, Richard Biener wrote:
> > Is that because si and pattern_def_si point to the same stmts? Then
> > I'd prefer to do
> >
> > if (is_store)
> >{
> > ...
> > pattern_def_seq = NULL;
> >
On Fri, Jan 31, 2014 at 09:41:59AM +0100, Richard Biener wrote:
> Is that because si and pattern_def_si point to the same stmts? Then
> I'd prefer to do
>
> if (is_store)
>{
> ...
> pattern_def_seq = NULL;
>}
> else if (!transform_pattern_stmt && gsi_end_p (pattern_def_si))
>
On Thu, 30 Jan 2014, Cong Hou wrote:
> Hi
>
> PR6 (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=6) is caused by
> GCC vectorizer. The bug appears when handling vectorization patterns. When
> a pattern statement has additional new statements stored in pattern_def_seq
> in vect_transform_loo
Wrong format. Send it again.
On Thu, Jan 30, 2014 at 4:57 PM, Cong Hou wrote:
>
> Hi
>
> PR6 (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=6) is caused by GCC
> vectorizer. The bug appears when handling vectorization patterns. When a
> pattern statement has additional new statements sto
