https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114860
--- Comment #8 from prathamesh3492 at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Hi Tamar,
Using -falign-loops=5 indeed brings back the performance.
The adrp instruction has same address (0x4ae784) by setting -falign-loops=5
(which reduces misalignment to 4)
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114860
--- Comment #4 from prathamesh3492 at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Hi Tamar,
Sorry for late response.
perf profile for povray with LTO:
Compiled with 82d6d385f97 (commit before a2f4be3dae0):
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114860
Bug ID: 114860
Summary: [aarch64] 511.povray regresses by ~5.5% with -O3 -flto
-march=native -mcpu=neoverse-v2
Product: gcc
Version: 14.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114736
--- Comment #11 from prathamesh3492 at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Hi Richard,
Thanks for the quick fix! I verified it now compiles the test-case with -O3
-mcpu=neoverse-v2. I suppose this will need backporting to gcc-13 branch. The
test compiles OK
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114736
--- Comment #6 from prathamesh3492 at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Created attachment 57957
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=57957=edit
SLP dump
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114736
--- Comment #5 from prathamesh3492 at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #3)
> Does -fno-cost-model affect the behavior here?
With 43da77a4, it doesn't result in ICE with -fno-vect-cost-model or
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114736
--- Comment #2 from prathamesh3492 at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Created attachment 57956
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=57956=edit
Input to SLP pass (dse4 dump)
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114736
--- Comment #1 from prathamesh3492 at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Investigating this a bit further, the ICE appears with gfortran-13 because for
the testcase, because length of postorder traversal over SLP graph (27) doesn't
match number of nodes (28),
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114736
Bug ID: 114736
Summary: ICE during SLP pass with gfortran-13 -O3
-mcpu=neoverse-v2
Product: gcc
Version: 13.2.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114323
prathamesh3492 at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||prathamesh3492 at
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112950
prathamesh3492 at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112950
prathamesh3492 at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111754
--- Comment #15 from prathamesh3492 at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Sorry for the regression, and thanks for the prompt fix!
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111754
prathamesh3492 at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111702
--- Comment #3 from prathamesh3492 at gcc dot gnu.org ---
HI, sorry for the breakage, will take a look.
Thanks,
Prathamesh
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111648
prathamesh3492 at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111754
--- Comment #7 from prathamesh3492 at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to Richard Biener from comment #5)
> It seems we have VECTOR_CST_NELTS_PER_PATTERN ({ 9.0e+0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0 })
> 2 and VECTOR_CST_NPATTERNS == 1. And the selector { 1, 0, 1, 2
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111754
--- Comment #6 from prathamesh3492 at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to rguent...@suse.de from comment #4)
> On Tue, 10 Oct 2023, prathamesh3492 at gcc dot gnu.org wrote:
>
> > https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111754
> >
> > ---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111754
--- Comment #3 from prathamesh3492 at gcc dot gnu.org ---
The issue is that we only support integral vector types in fold_vec_perm_cst,
but fail to check for the same before calling it from fold_vec_perm.
The following tweak fixes the ICE:
diff
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111754
--- Comment #2 from prathamesh3492 at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Hi,
Sorry for the breakage, will take a look.
Thanks,
Prathamesh
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111697
Bug ID: 111697
Summary: Sub optimal code gen for initialising vector using
loop
Product: gcc
Version: 14.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: enhancement
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111648
--- Comment #4 from prathamesh3492 at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to prathamesh3492 from comment #3)
> Created attachment 56037 [details]
> Untested fix
>
> The issue is that when a1 is a multiple of vector length, we end up creating
>
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111648
--- Comment #3 from prathamesh3492 at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Created attachment 56037
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=56037=edit
Untested fix
The issue is that when a1 is a multiple of vector length, we end up creating
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111648
--- Comment #1 from prathamesh3492 at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Hi,
Sorry for the breakage, will take a look.
Thanks,
Prathamesh
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111048
prathamesh3492 at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111048
--- Comment #8 from prathamesh3492 at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to rsand...@gcc.gnu.org from comment #7)
> = ((q1 & 0) == 0) ? VECTOR_CST_NPATTERNS (arg0)
> : VECTOR_CST_NPATTERNS (arg1);
>
> should be q1 &
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111048
--- Comment #6 from prathamesh3492 at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Sorry for the breakage, I will take a look.
Thanks,
Prathamesh
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110867
--- Comment #10 from prathamesh3492 at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to Stefan Schulze Frielinghaus from comment #9)
> It looks like as if the first fix didn't entirely solve the problem. It
> turns out that the normal form of const_int is not
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110857
--- Comment #6 from prathamesh3492 at gcc dot gnu.org ---
profiledbootstrap now works on aarch64-linux-gnu, thanks!
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110857
--- Comment #5 from prathamesh3492 at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Hi Honza,
Sorry for late response, and thanks for the fix! I am currently running
profiledbootstrap on aarch64 with your fix, and will let you know the results
after it completes.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110867
--- Comment #3 from prathamesh3492 at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to prathamesh3492 from comment #2)
> (In reply to Stefan Schulze Frielinghaus from comment #1)
> > The optimization introduced by r14-2879-g7cdd0860949c6c hits during
> >
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110867
--- Comment #2 from prathamesh3492 at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to Stefan Schulze Frielinghaus from comment #1)
> The optimization introduced by r14-2879-g7cdd0860949c6c hits during
> combination of insn
>
> (insn 31 3 32 2 (set (reg:SI 118
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110867
Bug ID: 110867
Summary: ICE in combine after
7cdd0860949c6c3232e6cff1d7ca37bb5234074c
Product: gcc
Version: 14.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110857
Bug ID: 110857
Summary: aarch64-linux-gnu profiledbootstrap broken
Product: gcc
Version: 14.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110280
prathamesh3492 at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||prathamesh3492 at
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107920
--- Comment #14 from prathamesh3492 at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Posted patch:
https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2022-December/607714.html
Thanks,
Prathamesh
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107920
prathamesh3492 at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Attachment #53992|0 |1
is
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107920
--- Comment #11 from prathamesh3492 at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Created attachment 53992
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=53992=edit
untested fix
Thanks for the suggestions. The attached patch uses gsi_replace_with_seq_vops
for
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106360
--- Comment #1 from prathamesh3492 at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Hi,
Sorry for the breakage. I will take a look.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96339
--- Comment #4 from prathamesh3492 at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to Tejas Belagod from comment #3)
> > Are you still working on this PR ? If not, can I assign it to myself ?
>
> Yes I am - its almost done - just been busy with a few higher
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96339
prathamesh3492 at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||prathamesh3492 at gcc
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93183
--- Comment #3 from prathamesh3492 at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to rsand...@gcc.gnu.org from comment #2)
> (In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #1)
> > We get:
> > .L3:
> > ld1bz0.b, p0/z, [x1, x3]
> > movprfx z2, z0
>
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66791
--- Comment #8 from prathamesh3492 at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Patch committed for vceq:
https://gcc.gnu.org/git/?p=gcc.git;a=commit;h=316dd79876873222552bdf6aa31338012bc9b955
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97903
--- Comment #2 from prathamesh3492 at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Fixed in
https://gcc.gnu.org/git/?p=gcc.git;a=commit;h=d9937da063e5847f45f7f1f7a02bed7dbc8fb2f6
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98636
--- Comment #17 from prathamesh3492 at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to Martin Liška from comment #15)
> I see, so it's a real issue and I support the workaround mentioned in
> Comment 10.
> Please send it to the mailing list.
Patch posted:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98636
--- Comment #16 from prathamesh3492 at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to Tamar Christina from comment #14)
> I just ran into the same problem, with a slightly different testcase:
This is a better one to reproduce the issue, thanks! I verified the
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98636
--- Comment #13 from prathamesh3492 at gcc dot gnu.org ---
IIUC, the issue comes from the following mismatch in cl_optimization_compare:
if (ptr1->x_arm_fp16_format != ptr2->x_arm_fp16_format)
internal_error ("% are modified in local
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98636
--- Comment #12 from prathamesh3492 at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Created attachment 50003
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=50003=edit
options-save.c
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98636
--- Comment #10 from prathamesh3492 at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Created attachment 49997
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=49997=edit
untested fix
Hi,
Sorry for late response. The option that seemed to be causing the issue was
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98636
prathamesh3492 at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||ktkachov at gcc dot
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98636
--- Comment #5 from prathamesh3492 at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Hi,
Unfortunately I am still getting the same ICE with
g:e91910d3576eeac714c93ec25ea3b15012007903.
Thanks,
Prathamesh
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98636
--- Comment #3 from prathamesh3492 at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Created attachment 49954
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=49954=edit
Output of passing --verbose
Command line option used to compile:
../arm-stage1-build/gcc/xgcc -B
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98636
--- Comment #2 from prathamesh3492 at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Created attachment 49953
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=49953=edit
Preprocessed test-case
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98636
Bug ID: 98636
Summary: [ARM] ICE on passing incompatible options for fp16
Product: gcc
Version: 11.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98537
--- Comment #6 from prathamesh3492 at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Thanks for the suggestions, I could reproduce it now.
Input to isel is:
_1 = a_2(D) == b_3(D);
c_4 = VEC_COND_EXPR <_1, { -1, -1, -1, -1 }, { 0, 0, 0, 0 }>;
return c_4;
For the
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98537
--- Comment #4 from prathamesh3492 at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Hi,
It seems to work on my machine for x86_64.
Compiling with -O3 (or -O2),
.optimized dump shows:
v4si foo (v4si b, v4si a)
{
v4si c;
vector(4) _1;
[local count: 1073741824]:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98435
prathamesh3492 at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Severity|normal |enhancement
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98435
Bug ID: 98435
Summary: [ARM NEON] Missed optimization in expanding vector
constructor
Product: gcc
Version: 11.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98200
Bug ID: 98200
Summary: [GIMPLE FE] ICE with parsing ternary expr with
-fgimple
Product: gcc
Version: 11.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97849
--- Comment #3 from prathamesh3492 at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Fixed on trunk.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97906
Bug ID: 97906
Summary: [ARM NEON] Missed optimization in lowering to vcage
Product: gcc
Version: 11.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97903
prathamesh3492 at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||missed-optimization
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97903
Bug ID: 97903
Summary: [ARM NEON] Missed optimization in lowering test
operation
Product: gcc
Version: 11.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97872
Bug ID: 97872
Summary: Missed optimization for less-than comparison on
vectors
Product: gcc
Version: 11.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97849
--- Comment #1 from prathamesh3492 at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Hi,
Sorry for the breakage, will take a look.
Regards,
Prathamesh
65 matches
Mail list logo
