https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45720
Bug 45720 depends on bug 43432, which changed state.
Bug 43432 Summary: Missed vectorization: "complicated access pattern" for
increasing and decreasing data indexing
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=43432
What|Removed
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45720
H.J. Lu changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45720
--- Comment #12 from Richard Guenther 2010-10-22
14:44:53 UTC ---
Author: rguenth
Date: Fri Oct 22 14:44:48 2010
New Revision: 165832
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=165832
Log:
2010-10-22 Richard Guenther
PR tree-o
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45720
--- Comment #11 from Richard Guenther 2010-10-22
13:22:18 UTC ---
Created attachment 22116
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=22116
untested patch
Patch which fixes the testcase (and some more).
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45720
Richard Guenther changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45720
--- Comment #9 from Uros Bizjak 2010-10-22 11:21:27
UTC ---
(In reply to comment #8)
> So I have no hypotheses about the reason of this exception.
> Maybe, it was indirect jump into the middle of instruction.
> I will continue attemts to create
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45720
--- Comment #8 from Vladimir Kharchenko 2010-10-22 10:15:16 UTC ---
It can happen that this file is minimal test case. :(
The piece of source:
961 if ((l_maxabs = temp.s_max[rw]) < 0)
962 {
963 l_maxabs =
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45720
--- Comment #7 from Richard Guenther 2010-10-22
08:59:56 UTC ---
We need some sort of a testcase.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45720
--- Comment #6 from Vladimir Kharchenko 2010-10-22 04:28:46 UTC ---
Quick investigation of 450.soplex failure shows that Segmentation fault is in
line 966 (file factor.cc). When I recompiled this file without the option
"-ffast=math", test passed.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45720
--- Comment #5 from H.J. Lu 2010-10-22 00:28:51
UTC ---
With SPEC CPU 2006, revision 165771 gave me:
1. 64bit using-O3 -funroll-loops -ffast-math:
Running 450.soplex ref peak lnx32e-gcc default
450.soplex: copy 0 non-zero return code (exit c
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45720
--- Comment #4 from H.J. Lu 2010-10-21 16:28:24
UTC ---
As of revision 165771, I still got
With runspec -c lnx-i686-gcc.cfg -n 1 -l -o asc -I all -T peak
*** Miscompare of ref.out, see
/export/gnu/import/svn/gcc-test/spec/2000/i686/spec/benchsp
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45720
--- Comment #2 from hjl at gcc dot gnu.org 2010-10-03
05:41:44 UTC ---
Author: hjl
Date: Sun Oct 3 05:39:32 2010
New Revision: 164914
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=164914
Log:
Disallow negative steps in vectorizer.
gcc/
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45720
Richard Guenther changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P1
--- Comment #1 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-09-18 18:45 ---
I also see 450.soplex and 481.wrf fail.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45720
--
hjl dot tools at gmail dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |4.6.0
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45720
15 matches
Mail list logo
