* [Bug testsuite/102946] gcc.dg/vect/pr101145_1.c etc. FAIL
2021-10-26 14:33 [Bug testsuite/102946] New: gcc.dg/vect/pr101145_1.c etc. FAIL ro at gcc dot gnu.org
@ 2021-10-26 14:34 ` ro at gcc dot gnu.org
2021-10-26 14:35 ` ro at gcc dot gnu.org
` (6 subsequent siblings)
7 siblings, 0 replies; 9+ messages in thread
From: ro at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2021-10-26 14:34 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102946
--- Comment #1 from Rainer Orth <ro at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
Created attachment 51666
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=51666&action=edit
32-bit sparc-sun-solaris2.11 pr101145_1.c.170t.vect
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 9+ messages in thread* [Bug testsuite/102946] gcc.dg/vect/pr101145_1.c etc. FAIL
2021-10-26 14:33 [Bug testsuite/102946] New: gcc.dg/vect/pr101145_1.c etc. FAIL ro at gcc dot gnu.org
2021-10-26 14:34 ` [Bug testsuite/102946] " ro at gcc dot gnu.org
@ 2021-10-26 14:35 ` ro at gcc dot gnu.org
2021-10-26 14:36 ` ro at gcc dot gnu.org
` (5 subsequent siblings)
7 siblings, 0 replies; 9+ messages in thread
From: ro at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2021-10-26 14:35 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102946
--- Comment #2 from Rainer Orth <ro at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
Created attachment 51667
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=51667&action=edit
32-bit sparc-sun-solaris2.11 pr101145_2.c.170t.vect
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 9+ messages in thread* [Bug testsuite/102946] gcc.dg/vect/pr101145_1.c etc. FAIL
2021-10-26 14:33 [Bug testsuite/102946] New: gcc.dg/vect/pr101145_1.c etc. FAIL ro at gcc dot gnu.org
2021-10-26 14:34 ` [Bug testsuite/102946] " ro at gcc dot gnu.org
2021-10-26 14:35 ` ro at gcc dot gnu.org
@ 2021-10-26 14:36 ` ro at gcc dot gnu.org
2021-10-27 6:45 ` [Bug testsuite/102946] [12 Regression] " rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
` (4 subsequent siblings)
7 siblings, 0 replies; 9+ messages in thread
From: ro at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2021-10-26 14:36 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102946
Rainer Orth <ro at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
CC| |guojiufu at gcc dot gnu.org
Target Milestone|--- |12.0
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 9+ messages in thread* [Bug testsuite/102946] [12 Regression] gcc.dg/vect/pr101145_1.c etc. FAIL
2021-10-26 14:33 [Bug testsuite/102946] New: gcc.dg/vect/pr101145_1.c etc. FAIL ro at gcc dot gnu.org
` (2 preceding siblings ...)
2021-10-26 14:36 ` ro at gcc dot gnu.org
@ 2021-10-27 6:45 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
2021-10-27 9:41 ` ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE
` (3 subsequent siblings)
7 siblings, 0 replies; 9+ messages in thread
From: rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2021-10-27 6:45 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102946
Richard Biener <rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Summary|gcc.dg/vect/pr101145_1.c |[12 Regression]
|etc. FAIL |gcc.dg/vect/pr101145_1.c
| |etc. FAIL
--- Comment #3 from Richard Biener <rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
Very likely might be fixed with properly aligning the data like with adding
a = __builtin_assume_aligned (a, __BIGGEST_ALIGNMENT__);
b = __builtin_assume_aligned (b, __BIGGEST_ALIGNMENT__);
at the top of each function in pr101145.inc - note the global variables
would then need a similar aligned attribute for correctness.
Rainer, if you can manage to test this and that works such change is
pre-approved.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 9+ messages in thread* [Bug testsuite/102946] [12 Regression] gcc.dg/vect/pr101145_1.c etc. FAIL
2021-10-26 14:33 [Bug testsuite/102946] New: gcc.dg/vect/pr101145_1.c etc. FAIL ro at gcc dot gnu.org
` (3 preceding siblings ...)
2021-10-27 6:45 ` [Bug testsuite/102946] [12 Regression] " rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
@ 2021-10-27 9:41 ` ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE
2021-10-27 9:42 ` ro at gcc dot gnu.org
` (2 subsequent siblings)
7 siblings, 0 replies; 9+ messages in thread
From: ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE @ 2021-10-27 9:41 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102946
--- Comment #4 from ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE <ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE> ---
> --- Comment #3 from Richard Biener <rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
> Very likely might be fixed with properly aligning the data like with adding
>
> a = __builtin_assume_aligned (a, __BIGGEST_ALIGNMENT__);
> b = __builtin_assume_aligned (b, __BIGGEST_ALIGNMENT__);
>
> at the top of each function in pr101145.inc - note the global variables
> would then need a similar aligned attribute for correctness.
>
> Rainer, if you can manage to test this and that works such change is
> pre-approved.
While this fixes the 64-bit SPARC case, the 32-bit failures remain.
pr101145_1.c dump attached.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 9+ messages in thread* [Bug testsuite/102946] [12 Regression] gcc.dg/vect/pr101145_1.c etc. FAIL
2021-10-26 14:33 [Bug testsuite/102946] New: gcc.dg/vect/pr101145_1.c etc. FAIL ro at gcc dot gnu.org
` (4 preceding siblings ...)
2021-10-27 9:41 ` ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE
@ 2021-10-27 9:42 ` ro at gcc dot gnu.org
2021-10-28 1:54 ` guojiufu at gcc dot gnu.org
2021-12-16 1:52 ` guojiufu at gcc dot gnu.org
7 siblings, 0 replies; 9+ messages in thread
From: ro at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2021-10-27 9:42 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102946
Rainer Orth <ro at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Attachment #51666|0 |1
is obsolete| |
--- Comment #5 from Rainer Orth <ro at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
Created attachment 51673
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=51673&action=edit
32-bit sparc-sun-solaris2.11 pr101145_1.c.170t.vect with a, b aligned
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 9+ messages in thread* [Bug testsuite/102946] [12 Regression] gcc.dg/vect/pr101145_1.c etc. FAIL
2021-10-26 14:33 [Bug testsuite/102946] New: gcc.dg/vect/pr101145_1.c etc. FAIL ro at gcc dot gnu.org
` (5 preceding siblings ...)
2021-10-27 9:42 ` ro at gcc dot gnu.org
@ 2021-10-28 1:54 ` guojiufu at gcc dot gnu.org
2021-12-16 1:52 ` guojiufu at gcc dot gnu.org
7 siblings, 0 replies; 9+ messages in thread
From: guojiufu at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2021-10-28 1:54 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102946
--- Comment #6 from Jiu Fu Guo <guojiufu at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
Hi Rainer and Richard,
Thanks for working on this PR.
The intention of these test cases (pr101145*) is to test if the number
of iterations can be calculated for the loop with the 'until wrap'
condition.
So, I'm thinking we may be able to update the cases like:
-/* { dg-final { scan-tree-dump-times "vectorized 1 loops" 2 "vect" } } */
+/* { dg-final { scan-tree-dump-times "Symbolic number of iterations is" 2
"vect" } } */
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 9+ messages in thread* [Bug testsuite/102946] [12 Regression] gcc.dg/vect/pr101145_1.c etc. FAIL
2021-10-26 14:33 [Bug testsuite/102946] New: gcc.dg/vect/pr101145_1.c etc. FAIL ro at gcc dot gnu.org
` (6 preceding siblings ...)
2021-10-28 1:54 ` guojiufu at gcc dot gnu.org
@ 2021-12-16 1:52 ` guojiufu at gcc dot gnu.org
7 siblings, 0 replies; 9+ messages in thread
From: guojiufu at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2021-12-16 1:52 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102946
Jiu Fu Guo <guojiufu at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
--- Comment #7 from Jiu Fu Guo <guojiufu at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
In trunk cases updated to run on the target which supports the cases (e.g.
vec_char_add)
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 9+ messages in thread