https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84777
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Known to work|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84777
--- Comment #14 from Richard Biener ---
Author: rguenth
Date: Tue Nov 20 14:47:49 2018
New Revision: 266318
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=266318&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2018-11-20 Richard Biener
Backport from mainline
2
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84777
--- Comment #13 from Richard Biener ---
I will backport.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84777
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||missed-optimization
Status|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84777
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||marxin at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #12
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84777
--- Comment #11 from Richard Biener ---
Author: rguenth
Date: Mon Mar 12 08:45:54 2018
New Revision: 258444
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=258444&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2018-03-12 Richard Biener
PR tree-optimization/84777
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84777
--- Comment #10 from Richard Biener ---
GCC 8 has the patch now.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84777
--- Comment #9 from rguenther at suse dot de ---
On Fri, 9 Mar 2018, linux at carewolf dot com wrote:
> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84777
>
> --- Comment #8 from Allan Jensen ---
> Yes, those I say are missing are compared to
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84777
--- Comment #8 from Allan Jensen ---
Yes, those I say are missing are compared to -O2. I was investigating this in
relation to Qt. We either build these files with -O3, or with -Os for customer
that are binary size sensitive. Since some of the im
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84777
--- Comment #7 from rguenther at suse dot de ---
On Fri, 9 Mar 2018, linux at carewolf dot com wrote:
> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84777
>
> --- Comment #6 from Allan Jensen ---
> Great. Your patch worked with 90% of the mark
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84777
--- Comment #6 from Allan Jensen ---
Great. Your patch worked with 90% of the marked loops!
The remaining report things like this with -fopt-info-vec-missed:
note: not vectorized: relevant stmt not supported: idisty.872_437 = (unsigned
int) idi
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84777
--- Comment #5 from rguenther at suse dot de ---
On Fri, 9 Mar 2018, linux at carewolf dot com wrote:
> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84777
>
> --- Comment #4 from Allan Jensen ---
> I will try the patch. I just tried -fopt-info
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84777
--- Comment #4 from Allan Jensen ---
I will try the patch. I just tried -fopt-info-vec-missed and the message
reported for every loop was:
note: not vectorized: latch block not empty.
note: bad loop form.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84777
--- Comment #3 from Richard Biener ---
FDO might also help given important loops should show up as hot.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84777
--- Comment #2 from Richard Biener ---
Hmm, patch can't help. Instead try the following which should make the omp
simd
case work.
Index: gcc/tree-ssa-loop-ch.c
===
--- gcc/tree-ssa
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84777
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
16 matches
Mail list logo
