https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83359
--- Comment #3 from amker at gcc dot gnu.org --- (In reply to Richard Biener from comment #2) > Both loops guarded by the IFN are parallelized with the loop noted by > the IFN outlined and the autopar scalar copy being a new loop. > > Not sure what to do best, eventually not processing those loops with > GRAPHITE/autopar and/or being more rigid in throwing it away. In theory > expanding the IFN as just its arg is valid. In current logic, we only keep distribution if it enables vectorization, one possible fix is we also keep it if parallelization is enabled. That is, resolve IFN_DIST call and keep the distribution in parallelization. Does this make sense?
