https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81408
--- Comment #10 from amker at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: amker
Date: Tue Jul 18 11:40:38 2017
New Revision: 250304
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=250304=gcc=rev
Log:
PR target/81408
* tree-ssa-loop-niter.c
: target
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: amker at gcc dot gnu.org
Target Milestone: ---
The test started failing from r248356 as below:
FAIL:gcc.dg/torture/pr52028.c -O3 -fomit-frame-pointer
-funroll-loops -fpeel-loops -ftracer -finline-functions
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81388
amker at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |amker at gcc dot
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81369
--- Comment #4 from amker at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: amker
Date: Mon Jul 17 11:40:54 2017
New Revision: 250270
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=250270=gcc=rev
Log:
PR target/81369
* tree-loop-distribution.c
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81369
--- Comment #3 from amker at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: amker
Date: Mon Jul 17 11:38:15 2017
New Revision: 250269
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=250269=gcc=rev
Log:
PR target/81369
* tree-loop-distribution.c
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81374
--- Comment #3 from amker at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: amker
Date: Mon Jul 17 11:34:30 2017
New Revision: 250268
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=250268=gcc=rev
Log:
PR tree-optimization/81374
* tree-loop-distribution.c
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81408
--- Comment #8 from amker at gcc dot gnu.org ---
After I deleted -funsafe-loop-optimizations in GIMPLE passes, there is no
"unsafe-loop-optimizations" for any GIMPLE optimizers. This message in
actuality means missed loop optimizati
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: amker at gcc dot gnu.org
Target Milestone: ---
Hi,
Compiling below test case:
typedef __Float32x2_t float32x2_t;
__inline float32x2_t vdup_n_f32(float) {}
float32x2_t vfma_lane_f32(float32x2_t __a, float32x2_t __b) {
int
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81408
amker at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |amker at gcc dot
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81369
amker at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |amker at gcc dot
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81374
amker at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81196
amker at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81374
--- Comment #2 from amker at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Okay, so bb_top_order_index_size should be inittialized to
last_basic_block_for_fn, rather than number of basic blocks since we don't
reuse index of deleted basic block. I am testing a patch.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81374
amker at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |amker at gcc dot
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81196
--- Comment #8 from amker at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: amker
Date: Thu Jun 29 10:41:28 2017
New Revision: 249778
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=249778=gcc=rev
Log:
PR tree-optimization/81196
* tree-ssa-loop-niter.c
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81196
--- Comment #6 from amker at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to Marc Glisse from comment #5)
> (In reply to amker from comment #4)
> > Hmm, the function can only be vectorized with "-march=skylake"?
>
> Er, it also vect
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81196
--- Comment #4 from amker at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Hmm, the function can only be vectorized with "-march=skylake"? So what
requirement is needed to add a test case for this?
Thanks.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81196
--- Comment #3 from amker at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to Richard Biener from comment #1)
> Probably some more elaborate handling in number_of_iterations_cond is
> required:
>
> /* We can handle the case when neither
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81196
--- Comment #2 from amker at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to Richard Biener from comment #1)
> Probably some more elaborate handling in number_of_iterations_cond is
> required:
>
> /* We can handle the case when neither
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81018
amker at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |amker at gcc dot
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81010
amker at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |amker at gcc dot
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80815
--- Comment #7 from amker at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to Rainer Orth from comment #6)
> Created attachment 41456 [details]
> sparc-sun-solaris2.12 pr80815-3.c.156t.vect
Thanks for reporting, I will investigate it and disable on t
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80815
--- Comment #5 from amker at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: amker
Date: Fri May 26 14:18:26 2017
New Revision: 248512
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=248512=gcc=rev
Log:
PR tree-optimization/80815
* tree-data-ref.c
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80884
amker at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |amker at gcc dot
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80815
--- Comment #4 from amker at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Also the three cases:
/* If the left segment does not extend beyond the start of the
right segment the new segment length is that of the right
plus the segment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80815
--- Comment #3 from amker at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to rguent...@suse.de from comment #2)
> On Fri, 19 May 2017, amker at gcc dot gnu.org wrote:
>
> > https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80815
> >
> > -
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80815
--- Comment #1 from amker at gcc dot gnu.org ---
GCC uses vect_factor as minimal segment length for dr_b when merging alias
pairs, I think it could be relaxed to vect_factor * abs (DR_STEP (dr_b)).
Below test shows this change can merge
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80815
amker at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||wrong-code
Priority
Priority: P3
Component: middle-end
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: amker at gcc dot gnu.org
Target Milestone: ---
Hi,
I was suspecting that vect_prune_runtime_alias_check_list is broken, now I can
create a test case for it:
#include
int arr[2048
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80791
--- Comment #1 from amker at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Sorry for causing this, I will investigate.
Thanks,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=27214
--- Comment #14 from amker at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to Richard Biener from comment #13)
> The desired cleanup is to make POINTER_PLUS_EXPR take a signed offset
> argument,
> aka ssizetype instead of sizetype.
>
>
: target
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: amker at gcc dot gnu.org
Target Milestone: ---
Hi,
After r247881, below invalid smull instructions are generated:
smull r2, r2, lr, r3
in test gcc.c-torture/execute/pr53645-2.c for arm-none-linux-gnueabi and
cortex-a9
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80724
--- Comment #1 from amker at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Also, the test case is fragile because we check instructions for a gimple level
transformation. Note, though the case is regressed, the original bug in
PR62178 remains fixed.
Component: tree-optimization
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: amker at gcc dot gnu.org
Target Milestone: ---
After r247885, test gcc.target/aarch64/pr62178.c failed as below:
gcc.target/aarch64/pr62178.c scan-assembler ld1r\\t{v[0-9]+.
Firstly, innermost loop
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53090
--- Comment #9 from amker at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: amker
Date: Thu May 11 09:50:15 2017
New Revision: 247893
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=247893=gcc=rev
Log:
PR tree-optimization/53090
* tree-ssa-loop-ivopts.c (enum
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79830
--- Comment #6 from amker at gcc dot gnu.org ---
BTW, I don't see problem in iv_elimination for the second loop, the .L7 one.
It eliminates three IVs into one IV. Well, the bloated loop header could be
further simplified, but it's another issue
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79830
--- Comment #5 from amker at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to Richard Biener from comment #1)
> It is induction variable optimization (-fivopts) that re-writes the main
> induction variable. We have
>
> Original cost 17 (
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78116
amker at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78116
--- Comment #17 from amker at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to Andrew Senkevich from comment #16)
> (In reply to amker from comment #13)
> > We should create another PR for additional copy instructions after my patch
> > and close
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80345
amker at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66278
--- Comment #7 from amker at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to Martin Liška from comment #6)
> (In reply to amker from comment #5)
> > (In reply to Martin Liška from comment #4)
> > > Greating, starting from r238586 the test-
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66278
amker at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||amker at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80463
--- Comment #1 from amker at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Not sure which pass should be responsible for this.
The test uses un-initialized variable e, which could cause undefined behavior?
Also if I change the test into:
int *a;
int b, c;
void
d
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80345
--- Comment #13 from amker at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: amker
Date: Tue Apr 11 08:15:51 2017
New Revision: 246833
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=246833=gcc=rev
Log:
Backport from mainline
2016-02-10 Bin Cheng <bin
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68021
--- Comment #18 from amker at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: amker
Date: Tue Apr 11 08:15:51 2017
New Revision: 246833
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=246833=gcc=rev
Log:
Backport from mainline
2016-02-10 Bin Cheng <bin
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80153
--- Comment #9 from amker at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: amker
Date: Mon Apr 10 16:54:14 2017
New Revision: 246811
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=246811=gcc=rev
Log:
PR tree-optimization/80153
* tree-ssa-loop-ivopts.c
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80153
--- Comment #8 from amker at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: amker
Date: Mon Apr 10 16:51:44 2017
New Revision: 246810
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=246810=gcc=rev
Log:
PR tree-optimization/80153
* tree-affine.c
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80345
amker at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||amker at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80153
--- Comment #7 from amker at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Case gcc.dg/tree-ssa/reassoc-19 failed, the ivopt dump before change is:
[15.00%]:
goto ; [100.00%]
[85.00%]:
_1 = (sizetype) element_8(D);
_2 = -_1;
_12 = (unsigned long) element_8
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80153
--- Comment #5 from amker at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to Richard Biener from comment #4)
> The reason for the tree-affine oddity is that IVO calls
>
> #0 tree_to_aff_combination (expr=,
> type=, comb=0x
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80153
amker at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80153
amker at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79347
amker at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66768
amker at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66768
--- Comment #12 from amker at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: amker
Date: Thu Mar 2 11:25:11 2017
New Revision: 245837
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=245837=gcc=rev
Log:
PR tree-optimization/66768
* tree-ssa-loop-ivopts.c
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78116
--- Comment #13 from amker at gcc dot gnu.org ---
We should create another PR for additional copy instructions after my patch and
close this one. IMHO they are two different issues.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78116
Bug 78116 depends on bug 77536, which changed state.
Bug 77536 Summary: Vectorizer not maintaining relationship of relative block
frequencies in absence of real profile data
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77536
What
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77536
amker at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77536
--- Comment #7 from amker at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: amker
Date: Mon Feb 27 10:20:36 2017
New Revision: 245754
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=245754=gcc=rev
Log:
PR tree-optimization/77536
* tree-ssa-loop-manip.c
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56541
amker at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53947
Bug 53947 depends on bug 56541, which changed state.
Bug 56541 Summary: vectorizaton fails in conditional assignment of a constant
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56541
What|Removed |Added
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79675
--- Comment #2 from amker at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to ktkachov from comment #1)
> I think ivopts also contributes here.
> Before ivopts the memory access and address are:
> s1_10 = s1_3 + 1;
> c1_11 = *s1_3;
>
> but
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79649
--- Comment #13 from amker at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to Uroš Bizjak from comment #12)
> The added testcase also ICEs with -O3 -mx32:
>
> ~/gcc-build/gcc/cc1 -O3 -mx32 -quiet pr79649.c
> pr79649.c: In function ‘f1’:
>
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79663
--- Comment #4 from amker at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to Richard Biener from comment #3)
> Eventually the rev. was backported already?
Nope, it's not backported yet. Now we need to wait sometime before backport
(including this one).
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79663
--- Comment #2 from amker at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Unfortunately, 2) is not appropriate, in non-ZERO chain case, the root combined
statement is used to setup next iterations combined result, it's not for
CSE-use in this iteration. Manually insert
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79663
amker at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target||aarch64
Priority|P3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79663
--- Comment #1 from amker at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Root cause understood. After patch, combine_chains looks like:
/* Process in reverse order so dominance point is ready when it comes
to the root ref. */
for (i = ch1->refs.length ()
Priority: P3
Component: tree-optimization
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: amker at gcc dot gnu.org
Target Milestone: ---
Change @r244815 causes 10% regression for spec1k/172.mgrid on AArch64. Hot
loop in resid_ is unrolled by factor=2 now in predcom
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77536
amker at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |amker at gcc dot
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69564
--- Comment #35 from amker at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to Richard Biener from comment #34)
> But as A + 8 >= B || A >= B + 8 is the same as ABS (A - B) >= 8 we might do
> better re-writing the overlap test in terms of this (o
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79347
--- Comment #13 from amker at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to Rainer Orth from comment #10)
> The new testcase FAILs on sparc-sun-solaris2.12, both 32 and 64-bit:
>
> +FAIL: gcc.dg/vect/pr79347.c -flto -ffat-lto-objects scan-tree-d
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78116
amker at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||amker at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77536
--- Comment #5 from amker at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to amker from comment #4)
> Looks like generic loop unrolling code used by predcom spends quite a lot
> maintaining profiling counter, I will check if that's correct and we shal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77536
amker at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||amker at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79347
--- Comment #12 from amker at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to Rainer Orth from comment #10)
> The new testcase FAILs on sparc-sun-solaris2.12, both 32 and 64-bit:
>
> +FAIL: gcc.dg/vect/pr79347.c -flto -ffat-lto-objects scan-tree-d
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79347
--- Comment #9 from amker at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to Pat Haugen from comment #7)
> See pr77536 for similar issue. Not sure if that should be marked as dup of
> this one or left open as a more general bug on what should b
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79347
--- Comment #8 from amker at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: amker
Date: Wed Feb 15 17:16:29 2017
New Revision: 245490
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=245490=gcc=rev
Log:
PR tree-optimization/79347
* tree-vect-loop-manip.c
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79460
--- Comment #10 from amker at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #9)
> (In reply to rguent...@suse.de from comment #8)
> > On Tue, 14 Feb 2017, jakub at gcc dot gnu.org wrote:
> >
> > > http
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79347
--- Comment #6 from amker at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to amker from comment #5)
> Testing a patch, will send for review soon if no failures.
After patching, # of mismatches in profile is improved from:
tramp3d-v4.cpp.157t.ifcvt:296
tram
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79460
--- Comment #5 from amker at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #4)
> (In reply to Richard Biener from comment #3)
> > In this case it is complete unrolling that can estimate the non-vector code
> > t
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79460
amker at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||amker at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79347
--- Comment #5 from amker at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Testing a patch, will send for review soon if no failures.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79347
amker at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||amker at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79291
--- Comment #3 from amker at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to Richard Biener from comment #2)
> It also looks like mips lacks implementation of any of the vectorizer cost
> hooks and thus defaults to default_builtin_vectorization_cost which
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78559
--- Comment #13 from amker at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: amker
Date: Fri Jan 27 14:42:23 2017
New Revision: 244979
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=244979=gcc=rev
Log:
PR rtl-optimization/78559
* combine.c (try_combine
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=76957
--- Comment #9 from amker at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to amker from comment #8)
> I will have a look. Thanks.
Tree dump is as below:
;; Function dsyr2k (dsyr2k, funcdef_no=0, decl_uid=4135, cgraph_uid=0,
symbol_order=3)
dsyr2k (long
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71437
--- Comment #13 from amker at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Proposed fix at https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2017-01/msg01981.html
It prefers symbolic range if there is no useful numeric range information.
Though I believe it is the right thing to do
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70754
--- Comment #14 from amker at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to Ramana Radhakrishnan from comment #13)
> Bin,
>
> Are you likely to backport this fix to GCC-5 and GCC-6 - or is it going to
> be Martin's fix ?
>
> Ramana
I wil
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=76957
--- Comment #8 from amker at gcc dot gnu.org ---
I will have a look. Thanks.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=39838
--- Comment #24 from amker at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to amker from comment #23)
> I can also confirm Os is fixed on trunk @244877 using reported command line,
> while O2 goes up to 76 now.
on arm (with -march=armv5te -mthumb -
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=39838
amker at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||amker at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71437
--- Comment #12 from amker at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to amker from comment #10)
> (In reply to amker from comment #9)
> > Root cause should be in VRP, looks like the iterative algorithm depends on
> > order of ssa operan
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79213
amker at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target||aarch64
Status
: normal
Priority: P3
Component: tree-optimization
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: amker at gcc dot gnu.org
Target Milestone: ---
This AArch64 test fails because IVOPT starts not choosing [base+offset]
addressing mode. Given auto-increment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79159
--- Comment #7 from amker at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: amker
Date: Tue Jan 24 13:09:27 2017
New Revision: 244868
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=244868=gcc=rev
Log:
PR tree-optimization/79159
* tree-ssa-loop-niter.c
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79159
--- Comment #6 from amker at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to amker from comment #5)
> (In reply to amker from comment #4)
> > Discussed with richi, and conclusion is that vrp issue is hard to fix at the
> > moment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70754
--- Comment #10 from amker at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: amker
Date: Mon Jan 23 15:59:19 2017
New Revision: 244815
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=244815=gcc=rev
Log:
PR tree-optimization/70754
* tree-predcom.c
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79159
--- Comment #5 from amker at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to amker from comment #4)
> Discussed with richi, and conclusion is that vrp issue is hard to fix at the
> moment. Easy way out is to investigate why cunrolli peels one addi
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79159
--- Comment #4 from amker at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Discussed with richi, and conclusion is that vrp issue is hard to fix at the
moment. Easy way out is to investigate why cunrolli peels one additional
iteration than necessary. Note cunrolli
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78604
--- Comment #7 from amker at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to Michael Meissner from comment #6)
> Unless -ffast-math or -fno-honor-nans is used, you cannot invert < to >=,
> because you will get a different result if either oper
301 - 400 of 827 matches
Mail list logo
