[Bug target/102543] -march=cascadelake performs odd alignment peeling

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102543 liuhongt at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED

[Bug target/102543] -march=cascadelake performs odd alignment peeling

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102543 --- Comment #11 from CVS Commits --- The master branch has been updated by hongtao Liu : https://gcc.gnu.org/g:d3152981f71eef16e50246a94819c39ff1489c70 commit r12-5390-gd3152981f71eef16e50246a94819c39ff1489c70 Author: liuhongt Date: Sat

[Bug target/102543] -march=cascadelake performs odd alignment peeling

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102543 --- Comment #10 from rguenther at suse dot de --- On Wed, 13 Oct 2021, crazylht at gmail dot com wrote: > https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102543 > > --- Comment #9 from Hongtao.liu --- > I'm curious why we need peeling for

[Bug target/102543] -march=cascadelake performs odd alignment peeling

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102543 --- Comment #9 from Hongtao.liu --- I'm curious why we need peeling for unaligned access, because unaligned access instructions should also be available for aligned addresses, can't we just mark mem_ref as unaligned (although this is fake, just

[Bug target/102543] -march=cascadelake performs odd alignment peeling

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102543 --- Comment #8 from Richard Biener --- I would mostly expect less peeling for alignment being done (and thus slightly smaller code size with the issue fixed).

[Bug target/102543] -march=cascadelake performs odd alignment peeling

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102543 --- Comment #7 from Hongtao.liu --- SPEC2017 data on CLX seems to ok after changing unaligned sse store cost. fprate: 503.bwaves_rBuildSame 507.cactuBSSN_r -0.22 508.namd_r -0.02 510.parest_r-0.28

[Bug target/102543] -march=cascadelake performs odd alignment peeling

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102543 --- Comment #6 from Richard Biener --- In the end only benchmarking will tell what is best to do (adjust the aligned cost or revert the unaligned cost).

[Bug target/102543] -march=cascadelake performs odd alignment peeling

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102543 --- Comment #5 from rguenther at suse dot de --- On Fri, 8 Oct 2021, crazylht at gmail dot com wrote: > https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102543 > > --- Comment #4 from Hongtao.liu --- > (In reply to Hongtao.liu from comment #3) >

[Bug target/102543] -march=cascadelake performs odd alignment peeling

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102543 --- Comment #4 from Hongtao.liu --- (In reply to Hongtao.liu from comment #3) > (In reply to Richard Biener from comment #2) > > Caused by > > > > commit 001e73373e6d2e7c756141e0d7ac8e24ae1574ad > > Author: Sergey Shalnov > > Date: Thu Feb

[Bug target/102543] -march=cascadelake performs odd alignment peeling

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102543 --- Comment #3 from Hongtao.liu --- (In reply to Richard Biener from comment #2) > Caused by > > commit 001e73373e6d2e7c756141e0d7ac8e24ae1574ad > Author: Sergey Shalnov > Date: Thu Feb 8 23:31:15 2018 +0100 > > re PR target/83008

[Bug target/102543] -march=cascadelake performs odd alignment peeling

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102543 --- Comment #2 from Richard Biener --- Caused by commit 001e73373e6d2e7c756141e0d7ac8e24ae1574ad Author: Sergey Shalnov Date: Thu Feb 8 23:31:15 2018 +0100 re PR target/83008 ([performance] Is it better to avoid extra instructions in

[Bug target/102543] -march=cascadelake performs odd alignment peeling

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102543 --- Comment #1 from Richard Biener --- same for icelake_cost.