https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=72817
--- Comment #7 from amker at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to Bill Seurer from comment #5)
> The new test case pr72817.c hangs on powerpc both BE and LE
>
> Executing on host: /home/seurer/gcc/build/gcc-trunk/gcc/xgcc
> -B/home/seur
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69848
--- Comment #16 from amker at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: amker
Date: Tue Aug 16 13:09:40 2016
New Revision: 239502
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=239502=gcc=rev
Log:
PR tree-optimization/69848
* config/aarch64/aarch64
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=73450
--- Comment #4 from amker at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: amker
Date: Tue Aug 16 09:13:50 2016
New Revision: 239494
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=239494=gcc=rev
Log:
PR tree-optimization/72817
PR tree-optimization/73450
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=72817
--- Comment #4 from amker at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: amker
Date: Tue Aug 16 09:13:50 2016
New Revision: 239494
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=239494=gcc=rev
Log:
PR tree-optimization/72817
PR tree-optimization/73450
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53090
--- Comment #8 from amker at gcc dot gnu.org ---
The additional copy instruction is because IVOPT doesn't rewrite
non-linear/comparison IV_use before the use point, instead, it rewrites it at
the statement the IV_use variable is defined.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53090
amker at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||amker at gcc dot gnu.org
Component: tree-optimization
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: amker at gcc dot gnu.org
Target Milestone: ---
Hi,
gcc.dg/vect/vect-117.c starts failing with patch at r238301. After
investigation I think it exposed a latent vectorizer issue. Before patch, the
loop
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69848
--- Comment #15 from amker at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: amker
Date: Fri Aug 12 14:58:20 2016
New Revision: 239416
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=239416=gcc=rev
Log:
PR tree-optimization/69848
* tree-vectorizer.h (enum
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=72855
--- Comment #13 from amker at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to Bill Schmidt from comment #10)
> Some experiments on trunk:
>
> - Using Bin's patch, I see compile time reduced to ~14 minutes.
> - Using Richi's patch, I see compile
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=73550
--- Comment #2 from amker at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #1)
> There was a patch to improve jump threading and vrp here just within a few
> weeks. I wonder why that did not help. Basically this is a missin
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=73450
amker at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||amker at gcc dot gnu.org
Priority: P3
Component: middle-end
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: amker at gcc dot gnu.org
Target Milestone: ---
Hi,
GCC trunk gives wrong -Wmaybe-uninitialized warning message on below switch
statement:
int fun1 (int, int);
int fun2 (int, int
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=72855
--- Comment #4 from amker at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Here is a simple refactoring patch.
diff --git a/gcc/loop-doloop.c b/gcc/loop-doloop.c
index c311516..9fb04cf 100644
--- a/gcc/loop-doloop.c
+++ b/gcc/loop-doloop.c
@@ -254,18 +254,51
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=72855
--- Comment #3 from amker at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to amker from comment #1)
> Among all loops in the large function, how many loops can be doloop
> optimized successfully? Function doloop__optimize has some valid checks on
&g
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=72855
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=33707
--- Comment #3 from amker at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: amker
Date: Tue Aug 9 15:10:55 2016
New Revision: 239292
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=239292=gcc=rev
Log:
gcc/testsuite
PR tree-optimization/33707
* gcc.dg
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=72772
--- Comment #11 from amker at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: amker
Date: Tue Aug 9 15:08:02 2016
New Revision: 239291
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=239291=gcc=rev
Log:
PR tree-optimization/72772
* tree-ssa-loop-niter.c
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=72772
--- Comment #10 from amker at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: amker
Date: Tue Aug 9 15:01:49 2016
New Revision: 239290
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=239290=gcc=rev
Log:
PR tree-optimization/72772
* tree-ssa-loop-niter.h
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=72817
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=72772
--- Comment #6 from amker at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to Richard Biener from comment #5)
> Ok, so we record a correct upper bound for a loop but then later thread1
> makes
> a mess of the loop structures, introducing multiple b
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69848
--- Comment #14 from amker at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to Jim Wilson from comment #13)
> I think it was poc_ref_pic_reorder() in slice.c that triggered the ICE. I
> don't know if the original code shows the vectorization reduction p
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69848
--- Comment #12 from amker at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Hi Jim,
May I ask which function in h264ref also shows this issue? I instrumented GCC
and could not found a case in it. Thanks.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69848
--- Comment #11 from amker at gcc dot gnu.org ---
I am also investigating as Alan suggested in comment #3 to see how to fix the
reduction issue.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=34114
--- Comment #8 from amker at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: amker
Date: Tue Aug 2 10:13:28 2016
New Revision: 238983
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=238983=gcc=rev
Log:
PR tree-optimization/34114
* tree-ssa-loop-niter.c
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=34114
--- Comment #7 from amker at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: amker
Date: Tue Aug 2 10:09:33 2016
New Revision: 238982
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=238982=gcc=rev
Log:
PR tree-optimization/34114
* fold-const.c (multiple_of_p
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=72772
--- Comment #2 from amker at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to Richard Biener from comment #1)
> Note that for some odd reason creating the preheader causes the PHI to appar.
> Fixing that would be appreciated - it's the make_forwarder_blo
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69848
--- Comment #10 from amker at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Patches @https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2016-08/msg00058.html and
https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2016-08/msg00059.html implements
vcond_mask/vec_cmp/vcond stuff on AArch64 and fix
-optimization
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: amker at gcc dot gnu.org
Target Milestone: ---
For below case
int foo (int flag, char
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66646
--- Comment #5 from amker at gcc dot gnu.org ---
After commit reordering passes:
commit 410372fef14173261ce8e547db98eafb3174921f
Author: rguenth <rguenth@138bc75d-0d04-0410-961f-82ee72b054a4>
Date: Thu May 19 07:39:52 2016 +
2
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57558
--- Comment #5 from amker at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: amker
Date: Fri Jul 29 15:48:25 2016
New Revision: 238877
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=238877=gcc=rev
Log:
PR tree-optimization/57558
* tree-vect-loop-manip.c
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67681
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 67681, which changed state.
Bug 67681 Summary: Missed vectorization: induction variable used after loop
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67681
What|Removed |Added
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67681
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=71683
--- Comment #3 from amker at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: amker
Date: Wed Jul 20 08:31:35 2016
New Revision: 238512
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=238512=gcc=rev
Log:
PR tree-optimization/71503
PR tree-optimization/71683
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71503
--- Comment #5 from amker at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: amker
Date: Wed Jul 20 08:31:35 2016
New Revision: 238512
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=238512=gcc=rev
Log:
PR tree-optimization/71503
PR tree-optimization/71683
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71769
--- Comment #6 from amker at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to nightstrike from comment #5)
> Could you backport to the branches?
Well, that's release manager's call. Richard?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71769
amker at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71769
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=71347
amker at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71347
--- Comment #6 from amker at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: amker
Date: Fri Jul 15 08:53:48 2016
New Revision: 238366
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=238366=gcc=rev
Log:
gcc/testsuite
PR tree-optimization/71347
* gcc.dg
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71503
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=69526
--- Comment #23 from amker at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to rdapp from comment #19)
> (In reply to rguent...@suse.de from comment #18)
> 2.
> Is there an idiomatic/correct way to check a VR_RANGE for overflow? Does it
> suff
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69526
--- Comment #22 from amker at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to rdapp from comment #21)
> (In reply to amker from comment #20)
> > IIUC we can simply handle signed/unsigned type differently. Given a has
> > int/uint type.
> &
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69526
--- Comment #20 from amker at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to rdapp from comment #19)
> (In reply to rguent...@suse.de from comment #18)
> >
>
> The match.pd patch is slowly assuming shape... Two things however I'm still
> un
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71632
--- Comment #4 from amker at gcc dot gnu.org ---
As in optimized dump:
:
c.1_1 = c;
_85 = *c.1_1;
_87 = *_85;
iftmp.0_88 = d_27(D) < _87 ? 1.0e+0 : 0.0;
_90 = MEM[(double *)_85 + 8B];
iftmp.0_91 = iftmp.0_88 < _90 ? 1.0e+0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71632
--- Comment #3 from amker at gcc dot gnu.org ---
The commit if-converts below loop:
:
# b.5_38 = PHI <0(3), _10(7)>
# d_40 = PHI <d_42(3), iftmp.0_22(7)>
# ivtmp_17 = PHI <5(3), ivtmp_37(7)>
_6 = (long unsigned int)
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71347
--- Comment #5 from amker at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to Rainer Orth from comment #4)
> Created attachment 38744 [details]
> pr71347.c.214t.optimized
>
> The new testcase FAILs on sparc*-sun-solaris2.* (both 32 and 64-bit
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71609
--- Comment #1 from amker at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Should be fixed by https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2016-06/msg01501.html ?
Thanks,
bin
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71354
--- Comment #3 from amker at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: amker
Date: Fri Jun 17 13:55:06 2016
New Revision: 237555
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=237555=gcc=rev
Log:
PR tree-optimization/71354
* gcc.dg/vect/vect-23.c: Use
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71347
--- Comment #3 from amker at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: amker
Date: Fri Jun 17 09:26:05 2016
New Revision: 237552
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=237552=gcc=rev
Log:
PR tree-optimization/71347
* tree-ssa-loop-ivopts.c
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71354
--- Comment #2 from amker at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: amker
Date: Fri Jun 17 09:21:12 2016
New Revision: 237551
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=237551=gcc=rev
Log:
PR tree-optimization/71354
* gcc.dg/vect/vect-23.c: Add
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71361
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=71354
--- Comment #1 from amker at gcc dot gnu.org ---
I think the case requires vect_cond which isn't enabled for sparc in
target-supports.exp.
I will add the requirement to the test.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71347
--- Comment #2 from amker at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Thanks for reporting this.
The dump after IVOPT now is:
:
# prephitmp_21 = PHI <pretmp_20(4), powmult_2(2)>
# prephitmp_23 = PHI <pretmp_22(4), powmult_2(2)>
# ivtmp.17_16
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71261
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=71288
--- Comment #3 from amker at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to Markus Trippelsdorf from comment #2)
> Actually it started with r235808.
Thanks for doing triage, I will look into this.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52563
--- Comment #16 from amker at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to Andre Vieira from comment #15)
> So the code change for sccp moves the following sequence out of the loop:
>
> _2 = (sizetype) i_30;
> _3 = _2 * 8;
> _10 =
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52563
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=68030
--- Comment #9 from amker at gcc dot gnu.org ---
I had a patch for this, will send for review.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69848
--- Comment #9 from amker at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: amker
Date: Thu May 19 09:03:36 2016
New Revision: 236447
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=236447=gcc=rev
Log:
PR tree-optimization/69848
* tree-vect-loop.c
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69848
--- Comment #8 from amker at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to amker from comment #7)
> (In reply to Jim Wilson from comment #6)
> > Testing the vcond_mask* patch with make check gave 6 regressions for both
> > armhf and aarch64
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69848
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=68030
--- Comment #8 from amker at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to rguent...@suse.de from comment #7)
> On May 10, 2016 6:25:57 PM GMT+02:00, "amker at gcc dot gnu.org"
> <gcc-bugzi...@gcc.gnu.org> wrote:
> >https://gcc.g
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68030
--- Comment #6 from amker at gcc dot gnu.org ---
It's not only the vectorizer generating CSE sub-optimal code, pre and lim also
do this kind of transform.
Compiling the attached example with below command line
$ ./gcc -S -Ofast -march=haswell
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57206
--- Comment #5 from amker at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: amker
Date: Thu May 5 16:20:54 2016
New Revision: 235926
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=235926=gcc=rev
Log:
gcc/testsuite
PR tree-optimization/57206
* gcc.dg
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70775
amker at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70771
amker at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56541
--- Comment #3 from amker at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: amker
Date: Tue May 3 09:04:46 2016
New Revision: 235808
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=235808=gcc=rev
Log:
PR tree-optimization/56541
* doc/invoke.texi (@item max
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70803
amker at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70803
--- Comment #3 from amker at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: amker
Date: Fri Apr 29 15:13:03 2016
New Revision: 235644
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=235644=gcc=rev
Log:
gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog
PR tree-optimization/70803
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69489
--- Comment #19 from amker at gcc dot gnu.org ---
:
# i_27 = PHI <0(3), i_21(5)>
# n1_29 = PHI <0(3), n1_20(5)>
# n2_28 = PHI <0(3), n2_34(5)>
i.1_7 = (sizetype) i_27;
_9 = u_8(D) + i.1_7;
_11 = *_9;
_13 = v_12
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69489
--- Comment #18 from amker at gcc dot gnu.org ---
So the question is why if-conversion generates:
_43 = _44 & _45;
_ifc__40 = _43 ? 1 : 0;
n2_34 = n2_28 + _ifc__40;
Not:
_43 = _44 & _45;
_XXX = (long int) _43;
n2_34 = n2_2
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69489
--- Comment #17 from amker at gcc dot gnu.org ---
The if-converted loop of the reported test is as:
:
# i_27 = PHI <0(3), i_21(5)>
# n1_29 = PHI <0(3), n1_20(5)>
# n2_28 = PHI <0(3), n2_34(5)>
i.1_7 = (sizetype) i_27;
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69489
--- Comment #16 from amker at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to amker from comment #15)
> Also the case is reported not vectorized on Solaris/SPARC in PR70803. I
> will investigate and follow up it in that ticket.
>
> Thanks.
H
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69489
--- Comment #15 from amker at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Also the case is reported not vectorized on Solaris/SPARC in PR70803. I will
investigate and follow up it in that ticket.
Thanks.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70803
--- Comment #1 from amker at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Thanks for reporting this, I will check it. Maybe a simple "vect_int_mult" to
skip on some targets.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70775
--- Comment #3 from amker at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: amker
Date: Tue Apr 26 11:10:47 2016
New Revision: 235436
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=235436=gcc=rev
Log:
PR tree-optimization/70771
PR tree-optimization/70775
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70771
--- Comment #4 from amker at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: amker
Date: Tue Apr 26 11:10:47 2016
New Revision: 235436
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=235436=gcc=rev
Log:
PR tree-optimization/70771
PR tree-optimization/70775
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68030
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=70771
--- Comment #3 from amker at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Had patch for this and PR70775, will send for review after testing.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70771
--- Comment #2 from amker at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Also like PR70775, this case failed the change allows single argument PHIs in
if-cvt now. It looks like there is something wrong when handling single
argument PHIs. Before the change, we simple
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69489
--- Comment #13 from amker at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to Julian Taylor from comment #12)
> the testcase in this ticket is not yet vectorized with gcc 20160421 (r235341)
Hi Julian, may I ask which target? It can be vectorized on x86
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69489
--- Comment #10 from amker at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to Andreas Schwab from comment #7)
> The second commit triggers this ICE on ia64:
>
> $ gcc/xgcc -Bgcc/ ../../gcc/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/pr70725.c -O3 -S
> ../../gcc/gcc/test
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70715
amker at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70715
--- Comment #1 from amker at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: amker
Date: Thu Apr 21 11:28:58 2016
New Revision: 235333
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=235333=gcc=rev
Log:
PR tree-optimization/70715
* tree-ssa-loop-niter.c
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69489
--- Comment #6 from amker at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: amker
Date: Wed Apr 20 15:57:01 2016
New Revision: 235292
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=235292=gcc=rev
Log:
PR tree-optimization/69489
* tree-if-conv.c
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56625
--- Comment #3 from amker at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: amker
Date: Wed Apr 20 15:41:45 2016
New Revision: 235289
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=235289=gcc=rev
Log:
PR tree-optimization/56625
PR tree-optimization/69489
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69489
--- Comment #5 from amker at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: amker
Date: Wed Apr 20 15:41:45 2016
New Revision: 235289
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=235289=gcc=rev
Log:
PR tree-optimization/56625
PR tree-optimization/69489
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66646
--- Comment #3 from amker at gcc dot gnu.org ---
BTW, shall we version the loop in ldist pass if # of iterations can't be
computed at compilation time. We can check the target dependent value when
deciding which version should be executed
Priority: P3
Component: tree-optimization
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: amker at gcc dot gnu.org
Target Milestone: ---
Hi, below is a case in which SCEV failed to prove no-overflow-ness of converted
unsigned type loop IV. As a result
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48052
amker at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48052
--- Comment #19 from amker at gcc dot gnu.org ---
I think this is fixed now.
ty: normal
Priority: P3
Component: tree-optimization
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: amker at gcc dot gnu.org
Target Milestone: ---
Given below test:
long unsigned int foo (int x)
{
return (long unsigned int) x * 12 - (long unsigned int)(x + 1) * 1
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69042
--- Comment #13 from amker at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Simple summary.
The test case provided in this PR is resolved by the two patches, but the
problem still exists if the first function in compilation unit triggers the
issue. This is because x86's
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69042
--- Comment #12 from amker at gcc dot gnu.org ---
The above two patches actually doesn't fix the problem, but I think it covers
the problem by bringing back the old behavior.
So Ilya, could you please check that status of the regression? Thanks
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69042
--- Comment #11 from amker at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: amker
Date: Wed Mar 23 15:26:43 2016
New Revision: 234430
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=234430=gcc=rev
Log:
PR tree-optimization/69042
* params.def
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69042
--- Comment #10 from amker at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: amker
Date: Wed Mar 23 15:24:20 2016
New Revision: 234429
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=234429=gcc=rev
Log:
PR tree-optimization/69042
* tree-ssa-loop-ivopts.c
ty: normal
Priority: P3
Component: bootstrap
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: amker at gcc dot gnu.org
Target Milestone: ---
With below configuration:
../gcc/configure --prefix=/data/work/gcc-patches/x86_64/trunk-orig//target/
--enable-lan
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69489
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=69042
--- Comment #9 from amker at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to amker from comment #8)
> Though adding candidate with offset stripped from base helps this case, it
> causes other regressions which I need to understand.
I can confirm that one
501 - 600 of 827 matches
Mail list logo
