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 698E7385741C; Mon, 16 Aug 2021 08:22:34 +0000 (GMT)
DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 sourceware.org 698E7385741C
From: "rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug tree-optimization/101925] [10/11/12 Regression] reversed
 storage order when compiling with -O3 only since r10-4742-g9b75f56d4b7951c6
Date: Mon, 16 Aug 2021 08:22:34 +0000
X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC
X-Bugzilla-Type: changed
X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None
X-Bugzilla-Product: gcc
X-Bugzilla-Component: tree-optimization
X-Bugzilla-Version: 12.0
X-Bugzilla-Keywords: wrong-code
X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal
X-Bugzilla-Who: rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
X-Bugzilla-Status: ASSIGNED
X-Bugzilla-Resolution: 
X-Bugzilla-Priority: P2
X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
X-Bugzilla-Target-Milestone: 10.4
X-Bugzilla-Flags: 
X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields: priority cc bug_status target_milestone assigned_to
Message-ID: <bug-101925-4-rcHuPf5wtT@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-101925-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
References: <bug-101925-4@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: Mon, 16 Aug 2021 08:22:34 -0000

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3D101925

Richard Biener <rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
           Priority|P3                          |P2
                 CC|                            |ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu.o=
rg
             Status|NEW                         |ASSIGNED
   Target Milestone|---                         |10.4
           Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org      |rguenth at gcc dot =
gnu.org

--- Comment #3 from Richard Biener <rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
Hmm, I suppose when the vectorizer detects grouped loads/stores in
vect_analyze_data_ref_accesses we have to give up.

OTOH even w/o grouped loads the vectorizer will rewrite a.b.c[i] to
MEM_REFs based on 'a' and thus not properly retain the reverse storage
attributes.

Which means a fix in vect_analyze_data_refs would be better?  OTOH other
loop optimizations also rely on refs that pass through data-ref analysis
to be reconstructible from the analyzed base + offset so even better
fail in data-ref analysis already?  I suppose that for regular loop opts
it might work to just set REF_REVERSE_STORAGE_ORDER on a MEM_REF
created from base + offset when the original DR_REF had that set?
But when vectorizing we're using a vector type for the access and clearly
the storage order bits apply to the component (which we _usually_ do not
change).

Eric, any suggestions?  Given the above I'd just fix vect_analyze_data_refs
and leave other loop opts "latent" (I can't actually think of a broken one)=
?=