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 A31FB3858CD1; Wed, 22 May 2024 11:42:32 +0000 (GMT)
DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 sourceware.org A31FB3858CD1
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gcc.gnu.org;
	s=default; t=1716378152;
	bh=NZ6zFKtW4PD6+1iYpJPfM+0QnHK3RrxKHUf4uNwrtbY=;
	h=From:To:Subject:Date:In-Reply-To:References:From;
	b=splAU+Sq9CIBXtjQ67tmknDzg2ofDCaBNGwzgl9GI/2PeqXxcNuHeNRpvvwzECecQ
	 8YdIm+ObQBTS+hxQfOCp283NeXPuEfIMvqapDMLgN4NeUGOSYUPpHyRwdV6ypXiirw
	 /E4aNHnuP9c57+sX5sBcOudOIykpO12sFqviZs0Q=
From: "ro at gcc dot gnu.org" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug testsuite/102954] [12/13/14/15 regression]
 gcc.dg/vect/pr33804.c XPASSes
Date: Wed, 22 May 2024 11:42:32 +0000
X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC
X-Bugzilla-Type: changed
X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None
X-Bugzilla-Product: gcc
X-Bugzilla-Component: testsuite
X-Bugzilla-Version: 12.0
X-Bugzilla-Keywords: testsuite-fail
X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal
X-Bugzilla-Who: ro at gcc dot gnu.org
X-Bugzilla-Status: UNCONFIRMED
X-Bugzilla-Resolution: 
X-Bugzilla-Priority: P3
X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
X-Bugzilla-Target-Milestone: 12.4
X-Bugzilla-Flags: 
X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields: 
Message-ID: <bug-102954-4-dgg8Hq4ZRe@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-102954-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
References: <bug-102954-4@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
List-Id: <gcc-bugs.sourceware.org>

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3D102954

--- Comment #8 from Rainer Orth <ro at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
(In reply to ro@CeBiTec.Uni-Bielefeld.DE from comment #2)
> > --- Comment #1 from Richard Biener <rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
> > It was likely the vect_worthwhile_without_simd_p changes where we might=
 now
> > vectorize this loop using (unaligned) 'int'.
> >
> > Can you confirm that?
>=20
> Indeed.  I've also noticed that another regression was caused by the
> same change:
>=20
> XPASS: gcc.dg/vect/slp-multitypes-3.c -flto -ffat-lto-objects=20
> scan-tree-dump-times vect "vectorized 1 loops" 1
> XPASS: gcc.dg/vect/slp-multitypes-3.c -flto -ffat-lto-objects=20
> scan-tree-dump-times vect "vectorizing stmts using SLP" 2
> XPASS: gcc.dg/vect/slp-multitypes-3.c scan-tree-dump-times vect "vectoriz=
ed
> 1 loops" 1
> XPASS: gcc.dg/vect/slp-multitypes-3.c scan-tree-dump-times vect "vectoriz=
ing
> stmts using SLP" 2
>=20
> Again 64-bit SPARC.

That test already has

/* { dg-final { scan-tree-dump-times "vectorized 1 loops" 1 "vect" { xfail
sparc*-*-* } } } */

so we could change the xfail to { sparc*-*-* && ilp32 } (although that migh=
t be
papering over the real issue).=