From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 25709 invoked by alias); 8 Jan 2006 13:49:26 -0000 Received: (qmail 25678 invoked by uid 48); 8 Jan 2006 13:49:25 -0000 Date: Sun, 08 Jan 2006 13:49:00 -0000 Message-ID: <20060108134925.25677.qmail@sourceware.org> X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC References: Subject: [Bug libfortran/21468] vectorizing libfortran In-Reply-To: Reply-To: gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org From: "dorit at il dot ibm dot com" Mailing-List: contact gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: Sender: gcc-bugs-owner@gcc.gnu.org X-SW-Source: 2006-01/txt/msg00729.txt.bz2 List-Id: ------- Comment #10 from dorit at il dot ibm dot com 2006-01-08 13:49 ------- > Reopening since many of the intrinsics could still vectorize better. Could help if you list specific functions that you expect to get vectorized. As far as dotprod is concerned - if it's operating on floats, you need to use -ffast-math or -funsafe-math-optimizations to enable vectorization. If it's dotprod of integers - probably the recent patches I sent to support reduction patterns (http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2005-12/msg01896.html) would be required (this functionality is present in auotvect; you can try to see if it's vectorized any better with autovect-branch). -- dorit at il dot ibm dot com changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |dorit at il dot ibm dot com http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=21468