* [Bug tree-optimization/102949] [12 regression] gcc.dg/vect/slp-reduc-1.c FAIL
2021-10-26 14:54 [Bug tree-optimization/102949] New: [12 regression] gcc.dg/vect/slp-reduc-1.c FAIL ro at gcc dot gnu.org
@ 2021-10-26 14:54 ` ro at gcc dot gnu.org
2021-10-27 6:52 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
` (7 subsequent siblings)
8 siblings, 0 replies; 10+ messages in thread
From: ro at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2021-10-26 14:54 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102949
Rainer Orth <ro at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Target Milestone|--- |12.0
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 10+ messages in thread* [Bug tree-optimization/102949] [12 regression] gcc.dg/vect/slp-reduc-1.c FAIL
2021-10-26 14:54 [Bug tree-optimization/102949] New: [12 regression] gcc.dg/vect/slp-reduc-1.c FAIL ro at gcc dot gnu.org
2021-10-26 14:54 ` [Bug tree-optimization/102949] " ro at gcc dot gnu.org
@ 2021-10-27 6:52 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
2021-10-28 8:10 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
` (6 subsequent siblings)
8 siblings, 0 replies; 10+ messages in thread
From: rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2021-10-27 6:52 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102949
Richard Biener <rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Last reconfirmed| |2021-10-27
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Ever confirmed|0 |1
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
Keywords| |wrong-code
--- Comment #1 from Richard Biener <rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
Surely mine, in the range of revs the relevant one would be
commit 4703182a06b831a9f47a5f8198e86042cadd938d
Author: Richard Biener <rguenther@suse.de>
Date: Fri Sep 17 12:48:09 2021 +0200
Revert no longer needed fix for PR95539
The workaround is no longer necessary since we maintain alignment
info on the DR group leader only.
2021-09-17 Richard Biener <rguenther@suse.de>
* tree-vect-stmts.c (vectorizable_load): Do not frob
stmt_info for SLP.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 10+ messages in thread* [Bug tree-optimization/102949] [12 regression] gcc.dg/vect/slp-reduc-1.c FAIL
2021-10-26 14:54 [Bug tree-optimization/102949] New: [12 regression] gcc.dg/vect/slp-reduc-1.c FAIL ro at gcc dot gnu.org
2021-10-26 14:54 ` [Bug tree-optimization/102949] " ro at gcc dot gnu.org
2021-10-27 6:52 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
@ 2021-10-28 8:10 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
2021-10-28 8:19 ` ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE
` (5 subsequent siblings)
8 siblings, 0 replies; 10+ messages in thread
From: rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2021-10-28 8:10 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102949
--- Comment #2 from Richard Biener <rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
Hm, I tried --target=sparcv8-sun-solaris2.11 but that seems to fail to
reproduce any vectorization with -O2 -ftree-vectorize. If I add -mvis I get
something
that could resemble the code you quote:
main1:
save %sp, -104, %sp
cmp %i0, 0
ble,pn %icc, .LL6
mov 30, %g1
sethi %hi(.LLC0), %g3
sethi %hi(uc), %g1
sll %i0, 4, %i0
or %g1, %lo(uc), %g1
sethi %hi(ub), %g2
ldd [%g3+%lo(.LLC0)], %f12
or %g2, %lo(ub), %g2
sethi %hi(.LLC1), %g3
add %i0, %g1, %i0
ldd [%g3+%lo(.LLC1)], %f14
.LL3:
ldd [%g1], %f18
ldd [%g1+8], %f16
ldd [%g2], %f10
ldd [%g2+8], %f8
fpsub32 %f10, %f18, %f10
fpsub32 %f8, %f16, %f8
add %g1, 16, %g1
fpadd32 %f14, %f10, %f14
fpadd32 %f12, %f8, %f12
cmp %i0, %g1
bne,pt %icc, .LL3
add %g2, 16, %g2
here it should be that %g1 is '&uc[0]' initially and maintain alignment.
But somehow we end up with:
.section ".data"
.align 4
.type uc, #object
.size uc, 64
uc:
.long 0
.long 1
.long 2
.long 3
so 'uc' is not properly aligned even though the vectorizer thinks it forces
that. And the rev in question likely caused that to misbehave.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 10+ messages in thread* [Bug tree-optimization/102949] [12 regression] gcc.dg/vect/slp-reduc-1.c FAIL
2021-10-26 14:54 [Bug tree-optimization/102949] New: [12 regression] gcc.dg/vect/slp-reduc-1.c FAIL ro at gcc dot gnu.org
` (2 preceding siblings ...)
2021-10-28 8:10 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
@ 2021-10-28 8:19 ` ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE
2021-10-28 8:23 ` ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu.org
` (4 subsequent siblings)
8 siblings, 0 replies; 10+ messages in thread
From: ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE @ 2021-10-28 8:19 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102949
--- Comment #3 from ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE <ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE> ---
> --- Comment #2 from Richard Biener <rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
> Hm, I tried --target=sparcv8-sun-solaris2.11 but that seems to fail to
> reproduce any vectorization with -O2 -ftree-vectorize. If I add -mvis I get
> something
> that could resemble the code you quote:
sparcv8-sun-solaris2.11 creates a SPARC V8 default configuration, while
the regular sparc-sun-solaris2.11 is SPARC V8+, i.e. SPARC with V9
extensions (which includes -mvis).
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 10+ messages in thread* [Bug tree-optimization/102949] [12 regression] gcc.dg/vect/slp-reduc-1.c FAIL
2021-10-26 14:54 [Bug tree-optimization/102949] New: [12 regression] gcc.dg/vect/slp-reduc-1.c FAIL ro at gcc dot gnu.org
` (3 preceding siblings ...)
2021-10-28 8:19 ` ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE
@ 2021-10-28 8:23 ` ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu.org
2021-10-28 8:25 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
` (3 subsequent siblings)
8 siblings, 0 replies; 10+ messages in thread
From: ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2021-10-28 8:23 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102949
--- Comment #4 from Eric Botcazou <ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
> Hm, I tried --target=sparcv8-sun-solaris2.11 but that seems to fail to
> reproduce any vectorization with -O2 -ftree-vectorize. If I add -mvis I get
> something that could resemble the code you quote:
Do you mean sparc-sun-solaris2.11 I presume? V8 is the 32-bit architecture of
the 90's, everything is V9 nowadays (but sparcv9-*-* is the 64-bit compiler).
But yes, in any case, -mvis is indeed always required to enable vectorization
on the SPARC V9.
> But somehow we end up with:
>
> .section ".data"
> .align 4
> .type uc, #object
> .size uc, 64
> uc:
> .long 0
> .long 1
> .long 2
> .long 3
>
> so 'uc' is not properly aligned even though the vectorizer thinks it forces
> that. And the rev in question likely caused that to misbehave.
Possibly too low BIGGEST_ALIGNMENT in 32-bit mode?
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 10+ messages in thread* [Bug tree-optimization/102949] [12 regression] gcc.dg/vect/slp-reduc-1.c FAIL
2021-10-26 14:54 [Bug tree-optimization/102949] New: [12 regression] gcc.dg/vect/slp-reduc-1.c FAIL ro at gcc dot gnu.org
` (4 preceding siblings ...)
2021-10-28 8:23 ` ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu.org
@ 2021-10-28 8:25 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
2021-10-28 9:02 ` cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org
` (2 subsequent siblings)
8 siblings, 0 replies; 10+ messages in thread
From: rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2021-10-28 8:25 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102949
--- Comment #5 from Richard Biener <rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
(In reply to Eric Botcazou from comment #4)
> > Hm, I tried --target=sparcv8-sun-solaris2.11 but that seems to fail to
> > reproduce any vectorization with -O2 -ftree-vectorize. If I add -mvis I get
> > something that could resemble the code you quote:
>
> Do you mean sparc-sun-solaris2.11 I presume? V8 is the 32-bit architecture
> of the 90's, everything is V9 nowadays (but sparcv9-*-* is the 64-bit
> compiler).
> But yes, in any case, -mvis is indeed always required to enable
> vectorization on the SPARC V9.
>
> > But somehow we end up with:
> >
> > .section ".data"
> > .align 4
> > .type uc, #object
> > .size uc, 64
> > uc:
> > .long 0
> > .long 1
> > .long 2
> > .long 3
> >
> > so 'uc' is not properly aligned even though the vectorizer thinks it forces
> > that. And the rev in question likely caused that to misbehave.
>
> Possibly too low BIGGEST_ALIGNMENT in 32-bit mode?
For the default to work, yes - but I'm testing a patch fixing the vectorizer
which attemts to override DECL_ALIGN but fails because of a mistake in
the mentioned revision.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 10+ messages in thread* [Bug tree-optimization/102949] [12 regression] gcc.dg/vect/slp-reduc-1.c FAIL
2021-10-26 14:54 [Bug tree-optimization/102949] New: [12 regression] gcc.dg/vect/slp-reduc-1.c FAIL ro at gcc dot gnu.org
` (5 preceding siblings ...)
2021-10-28 8:25 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
@ 2021-10-28 9:02 ` cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org
2021-10-28 9:03 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
2021-10-29 7:02 ` ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE
8 siblings, 0 replies; 10+ messages in thread
From: cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2021-10-28 9:02 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102949
--- Comment #6 from CVS Commits <cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
The master branch has been updated by Richard Biener <rguenth@gcc.gnu.org>:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:eed248bb8cc3091e8a9b2f73138c691396752438
commit r12-4763-geed248bb8cc3091e8a9b2f73138c691396752438
Author: Richard Biener <rguenther@suse.de>
Date: Thu Oct 28 10:07:40 2021 +0200
tree-optimization/102949 - fix base object alignment
This fixes fallout of g:4703182a06b831a9 where we now silently fail
to force alignment of a base object. The fix is to look at the
dr_info of the group leader to be consistent with alignment analysis.
2021-10-28 Richard Biener <rguenther@suse.de>
PR tree-optimization/102949
* tree-vect-stmts.c (ensure_base_align): Look at the
dr_info of a group leader and assert we are looking at
one with analyzed alignment.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 10+ messages in thread* [Bug tree-optimization/102949] [12 regression] gcc.dg/vect/slp-reduc-1.c FAIL
2021-10-26 14:54 [Bug tree-optimization/102949] New: [12 regression] gcc.dg/vect/slp-reduc-1.c FAIL ro at gcc dot gnu.org
` (6 preceding siblings ...)
2021-10-28 9:02 ` cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org
@ 2021-10-28 9:03 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
2021-10-29 7:02 ` ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE
8 siblings, 0 replies; 10+ messages in thread
From: rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2021-10-28 9:03 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102949
Richard Biener <rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Status|ASSIGNED |RESOLVED
Resolution|--- |FIXED
--- Comment #7 from Richard Biener <rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
Fixed (by inspecting assembly).
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 10+ messages in thread* [Bug tree-optimization/102949] [12 regression] gcc.dg/vect/slp-reduc-1.c FAIL
2021-10-26 14:54 [Bug tree-optimization/102949] New: [12 regression] gcc.dg/vect/slp-reduc-1.c FAIL ro at gcc dot gnu.org
` (7 preceding siblings ...)
2021-10-28 9:03 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
@ 2021-10-29 7:02 ` ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE
8 siblings, 0 replies; 10+ messages in thread
From: ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE @ 2021-10-29 7:02 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102949
--- Comment #8 from ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE <ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE> ---
> --- Comment #7 from Richard Biener <rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
> Fixed (by inspecting assembly).
Indeed: the execution tests PASS again. Thanks.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 10+ messages in thread