https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82965
Eric Gallager changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||patch
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82965
bin.cheng changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||amker.cheng at gmail dot com
--- Comment #10
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82965
Jeffrey A. Law changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||andrey.y.guskov at intel dot
com
--- C
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82965
--- Comment #8 from amker at gcc dot gnu.org ---
I think there is inconsistent semantics between call in vect_do_peeling:
scale_loop_profile (prolog, prob_prolog, bound_prolog);
and implementation of scale_loop_profile.
When the loop is predi
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82965
--- Comment #7 from amker at gcc dot gnu.org ---
While I am understanding the issue. The dump of ifcvt pass is as below:
;; basic block 2, loop depth 0, count 118111601 (estimated locally), maybe
hot
;;prev block 0, next block 3, flags: (
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82965
--- Comment #6 from amker at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #5)
> Bin or Honza, can you please have a look?
Oh, sorry for missing this. I will look into the case but maybe Honza will be
faster :)
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82965
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||amker at gcc dot gnu.org,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82965
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P1
Status|UNCONFIRMED
