[Bug target/95125] Unoptimal code for vectorized conversions

2021-08-02 Thread crazylht at gmail dot com via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95125 --- Comment #11 from Hongtao.liu --- (In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #10) > float_double and fix_double don't produce the best code yet. It's because loop vectorizer can only use one vector size, since BB vect supports different vector

[Bug target/95125] Unoptimal code for vectorized conversions

2021-08-02 Thread pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95125 --- Comment #10 from Andrew Pinski --- float_double and fix_double don't produce the best code yet.

[Bug target/95125] Unoptimal code for vectorized conversions

2020-05-24 Thread cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95125 --- Comment #9 from CVS Commits --- The master branch has been updated by hongtao Liu : https://gcc.gnu.org/g:94c0409717bf8bf783963c1d50bb8f4a4732dce7 commit r11-596-g94c0409717bf8bf783963c1d50bb8f4a4732dce7 Author: liuhongt Date: Sat May

[Bug target/95125] Unoptimal code for vectorized conversions

2020-05-22 Thread rsandifo at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95125 --- Comment #8 from rsandifo at gcc dot gnu.org --- (In reply to Richard Biener from comment #7) > (In reply to Uroš Bizjak from comment #6) > > (In reply to Hongtao.liu from comment #5) > > > (In reply to Uroš Bizjak from comment #3) > > > >

[Bug target/95125] Unoptimal code for vectorized conversions

2020-05-22 Thread rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95125 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added CC||rsandifo at gcc dot gnu.org ---

[Bug target/95125] Unoptimal code for vectorized conversions

2020-05-22 Thread ubizjak at gmail dot com
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95125 Uroš Bizjak changed: What|Removed |Added CC||rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment #6

[Bug target/95125] Unoptimal code for vectorized conversions

2020-05-22 Thread crazylht at gmail dot com
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95125 --- Comment #5 from Hongtao.liu --- (In reply to Uroš Bizjak from comment #3) > It turns out that a bunch of patterns have to be renamed (and testcases > added). > > Easyhack, waiting for someone to show some love to conversion patterns in >

[Bug target/95125] Unoptimal code for vectorized conversions

2020-05-21 Thread crazylht at gmail dot com
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95125 --- Comment #4 from Hongtao.liu --- (In reply to Uroš Bizjak from comment #3) > It turns out that a bunch of patterns have to be renamed (and testcases > added). > > Easyhack, waiting for someone to show some love to conversion patterns in >

[Bug target/95125] Unoptimal code for vectorized conversions

2020-05-14 Thread ubizjak at gmail dot com
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95125 --- Comment #3 from Uroš Bizjak --- It turns out that a bunch of patterns have to be renamed (and testcases added). Easyhack, waiting for someone to show some love to conversion patterns in sse.md.

[Bug target/95125] Unoptimal code for vectorized conversions

2020-05-14 Thread ubizjak at gmail dot com
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95125 --- Comment #2 from Uroš Bizjak --- (In reply to Richard Biener from comment #1) > ISTR I filed a duplicate 10 years ago or so. The issue is the vectorizer > could not handle V4DFmode -> V4SFmode conversions. > > Could, because for SVE we

[Bug target/95125] Unoptimal code for vectorized conversions

2020-05-14 Thread rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95125 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Version|unknown |11.0 Ever confirmed|0