https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104579
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |DUPLICATE
Status|NEW
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104579
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Severity|normal |enhancement
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104579
--- Comment #5 from Hongtao.liu ---
PR50374?
It's from Fotran minloc/maxloc intrinsics.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104579
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Ever confirmed|0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104579
--- Comment #3 from Hongtao.liu ---
(In reply to Hongtao.liu from comment #2)
> One possible way is sink maxInt = src[i] out of loop, when there's
> synchronised index search in the loop, just like below.
>
For scalar part, it's 1 conditional m
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104579
--- Comment #2 from Hongtao.liu ---
One possible way is sink maxInt = src[i] out of loop, when there's synchronised
index search in the loop, just like below.
int max (int *src, int n, int *position)
{
int maxInt;
int maxIndex;
int i;
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104579
--- Comment #1 from Hongtao.liu ---
cut
/* Function vect_is_simple_reduction
(1) Detect a cross-iteration def-use cycle that represents a simple
reduction computation. We look for the following pattern:
loop_
