https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68953
vries at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68953
--- Comment #10 from vries at gcc dot gnu.org ---
asked follow-up question (
https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2016-04/msg00444.html ), waiting for answer
before marking fixed-resolved.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68953
--- Comment #9 from vries at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: vries
Date: Sat Apr 9 15:28:24 2016
New Revision: 234851
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=234851=gcc=rev
Log:
Fix pdr accesses order
2016-04-09 Tom de Vries
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68953
vries at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |vries at gcc dot
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68953
vries at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||patch
--- Comment #7 from
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68953
--- Comment #6 from vries at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to vries from comment #5)
> The patch changes the order of the subscript functions
Oops, that's accesses, actually.
> (that was the easiest
> for me to implement) to:
> [alias set,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68953
--- Comment #5 from vries at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Created attachment 38207
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=38207=edit
demonstrator patch
In add_pdr_constraints, for the EXTRADIM=0 case we have:
...
accesses: { S_4[i1, i2] ->
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68953
--- Comment #4 from vries at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Created attachment 38178
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=38178=edit
UDIFF
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68953
--- Comment #3 from vries at gcc dot gnu.org ---
A way to look at the problem is to compare against the dump info for the
variant without the extra (redundant) dimension.
So, compare dump-info for -DEXTRADIM={0,1} for this source:
...
#if
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68953
--- Comment #2 from vries at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to vries from comment #1)
> Created attachment 38141 [details]
> updated test-case
>
> Fails with -O1, passes with -O2.
>
> The problem is that this loop nest:
> ...
> for (zh = 0;
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68953
--- Comment #1 from vries at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Created attachment 38141
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=38141=edit
updated test-case
Fails with -O1, passes with -O2.
The problem is that this loop nest:
...
for (zh = 0;
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68953
vries at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68953
Jeffrey A. Law changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P4
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68953
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||spop at gcc dot gnu.org
Target
14 matches
Mail list logo