From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 3514 invoked by alias); 22 Jul 2010 21:17:50 -0000 Received: (qmail 3450 invoked by alias); 22 Jul 2010 21:17:37 -0000 Date: Thu, 22 Jul 2010 21:17:00 -0000 Message-ID: <20100722211737.3449.qmail@sourceware.org> X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC References: Subject: [Bug tree-optimization/45022] No prefetch for the vectorized loop In-Reply-To: Reply-To: gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org From: "rakdver at kam dot mff dot cuni dot cz" Mailing-List: contact gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: Sender: gcc-bugs-owner@gcc.gnu.org X-SW-Source: 2010-07/txt/msg02439.txt.bz2 ------- Comment #3 from rakdver at kam dot mff dot cuni dot cz 2010-07-22 21:17 ------- Subject: Re: No prefetch for the vectorized loop > ------- Comment #2 from changpeng dot fang at amd dot com 2010-07-22 20:52 ------- > (In reply to comment #1) > > The misaligned indirect-refs will vanish soon. > > > > >From the prefetching point of view, is there any reason that we can not > prefetch > for mis-aligned or indirect refs? refs may be too aggressive> we do prefetching for indirect refs. As for mis-aligned refs, I was a bit worried that perhaps on some architectures, taking their address might not be valid; but it is likely that I am mistaken on this. -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45022