[Bug tree-optimization/81082] [8 Regression] Failure to vectorise after reassociating index computation

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81082 --- Comment #12 from Richard Biener --- Author: rguenth Date: Fri Jan 26 10:30:36 2018 New Revision: 257077 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=257077=gcc=rev Log: 2018-01-26 Richard Biener PR

[Bug tree-optimization/81082] [8 Regression] Failure to vectorise after reassociating index computation

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81082 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug tree-optimization/81082] [8 Regression] Failure to vectorise after reassociating index computation

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81082 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added CC||kristerw at gcc dot gnu.org ---

[Bug tree-optimization/81082] [8 Regression] Failure to vectorise after reassociating index computation

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81082 --- Comment #9 from Marc Glisse --- + (if (! INTEGRAL_TYPE_P (type) Integer vectors satisfy this condition... Also, floats need some check (I don't know which one is appropriate).

[Bug tree-optimization/81082] [8 Regression] Failure to vectorise after reassociating index computation

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81082 --- Comment #8 from rsandifo at gcc dot gnu.org --- (In reply to Richard Biener from comment #6) > So moving the transform to match.pd will only have an effect in late VRP > given we need loop header copying to derive a range for the bNs. > >

[Bug tree-optimization/81082] [8 Regression] Failure to vectorise after reassociating index computation

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81082 --- Comment #7 from Richard Biener --- FAIL: gcc.dg/tree-ssa/loop-15.c scan-tree-dump-times optimized " + " 0 (found 2 times) the loop is gone but we end up with unfolded _1 = (unsigned int) n_5; _10 = _1 + 4294967295; _6 = (int)

[Bug tree-optimization/81082] [8 Regression] Failure to vectorise after reassociating index computation

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81082 --- Comment #6 from Richard Biener --- So moving the transform to match.pd will only have an effect in late VRP given we need loop header copying to derive a range for the bNs. The following is what I've done, remove the problematic foldings

[Bug tree-optimization/81082] [8 Regression] Failure to vectorise after reassociating index computation

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81082 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED Assignee|unassigned

[Bug tree-optimization/81082] [8 Regression] Failure to vectorise after reassociating index computation

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81082 --- Comment #4 from Richard Biener --- Created attachment 43003 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=43003=edit patch introducing "late" gimple with -fwrapv semantics So that was for another PR, PR81554.

[Bug tree-optimization/81082] [8 Regression] Failure to vectorise after reassociating index computation

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81082 --- Comment #3 from Richard Biener --- (In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #2) > So is there anything we can do here? > Isn't the bigger problem that we no longer notice the multiplications can't > overflow? Yes, that's the issue with all

[Bug tree-optimization/81082] [8 Regression] Failure to vectorise after reassociating index computation

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81082 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment #2

[Bug tree-optimization/81082] [8 Regression] Failure to vectorise after reassociating index computation

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81082 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Last reconfirmed|

[Bug tree-optimization/81082] [8 Regression] Failure to vectorise after reassociating index computation

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81082 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords||missed-optimization