From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
Received: by sourceware.org (Postfix, from userid 48)
 id AE8CD385843D; Fri, 25 Feb 2022 08:31:13 +0000 (GMT)
DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 sourceware.org AE8CD385843D
From: "lili.cui at intel dot com" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug target/101908] [12 regression] cray regression with -O2
 -ftree-slp-vectorize compared to -O2
Date: Fri, 25 Feb 2022 08:31:13 +0000
X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC
X-Bugzilla-Type: changed
X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None
X-Bugzilla-Product: gcc
X-Bugzilla-Component: target
X-Bugzilla-Version: 12.0
X-Bugzilla-Keywords: missed-optimization
X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal
X-Bugzilla-Who: lili.cui at intel dot com
X-Bugzilla-Status: NEW
X-Bugzilla-Resolution: 
X-Bugzilla-Priority: P1
X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
X-Bugzilla-Target-Milestone: 12.0
X-Bugzilla-Flags: 
X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields: 
Message-ID: <bug-101908-4-26TJrw0TFC@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-101908-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
References: <bug-101908-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
X-Bugzilla-URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/
Auto-Submitted: auto-generated
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-BeenThere: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: Gcc-bugs mailing list <gcc-bugs.gcc.gnu.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://gcc.gnu.org/mailman/options/gcc-bugs>,
 <mailto:gcc-bugs-request@gcc.gnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-bugs/>
List-Post: <mailto:gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gcc-bugs-request@gcc.gnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://gcc.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gcc-bugs>,
 <mailto:gcc-bugs-request@gcc.gnu.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 25 Feb 2022 08:31:13 -0000

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3D101908

--- Comment #24 from cuilili <lili.cui at intel dot com> ---
(In reply to cuilili from comment #23)
> (In reply to Richard Biener from comment #17)
> > I do wonder though how CLX is fine with such access pattern ;)  (did yo=
u test
> > with just -O2?)
>=20
Sorry, correct w/ and w/t order.

 Actually CLX also has STLF issues, there is 13.7% regression when comparing
 "gcc trunk + -O2" w/t and w/ "-fno-tree-vectorize"=