public inbox for gcc-bugs@sourceware.org help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "segher at gcc dot gnu.org" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org> To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org Subject: [Bug target/107692] [13 regression] r13-3950-g071e428c24ee8c breaks many test cases Date: Fri, 18 Nov 2022 21:44:14 +0000 [thread overview] Message-ID: <bug-107692-4-4Km9j54NVE@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/> (raw) In-Reply-To: <bug-107692-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107692 --- Comment #10 from Segher Boessenkool <segher at gcc dot gnu.org> --- (In reply to Hongyu Wang from comment #9) > The difference is, -mno-unroll-only-small-loops -O2 would cause > rtl-loop-unroll takeing effect, No. -m{no-,}unroll-only-small-loops does not enable or disable loop unrolling at all. The only thing it does is modify which loops are candidate to be unrolled. > I think the intension of -munroll-only-small-loops is to just adjust > rtl-loop-unrolling and do not touch middle-end unroll/cunroll. It modifies the behaviour of -funroll-loops. It doesn't do anythyng else. Anything that wants to see if unrolling is active can just look if flag_unroll_loops is set. The sane and simple thing. > But I think > your point is also reasonable. Maybe we can split the flag_unroll_loops to > tree and rtl seperately? Users do not care if something is done on Gimple or on RTL. The command line flags are for users. They work fine as-is. > Anyway I will propose a patch and re-discuss with maintainers later. Thanks! Please fix this regression asap. It is a P1, and we are in stage 3 already.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2022-11-18 21:44 UTC|newest] Thread overview: 17+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top 2022-11-14 21:20 [Bug target/107692] New: " seurer at gcc dot gnu.org 2022-11-14 21:51 ` [Bug target/107692] " pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org 2022-11-15 5:33 ` pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org 2022-11-15 7:02 ` wwwhhhyyy333 at gmail dot com 2022-11-15 11:49 ` segher at gcc dot gnu.org 2022-11-16 13:19 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org 2022-11-18 6:11 ` guojiufu at gcc dot gnu.org 2022-11-18 6:13 ` guojiufu at gcc dot gnu.org 2022-11-18 7:07 ` wwwhhhyyy333 at gmail dot com 2022-11-18 13:35 ` guojiufu at gcc dot gnu.org 2022-11-18 14:11 ` segher at gcc dot gnu.org 2022-11-18 14:12 ` segher at gcc dot gnu.org 2022-11-18 19:37 ` wwwhhhyyy333 at gmail dot com 2022-11-18 21:44 ` segher at gcc dot gnu.org [this message] 2022-11-24 1:20 ` cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org 2022-11-24 1:22 ` wwwhhhyyy333 at gmail dot com 2022-12-19 22:53 ` pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org
Reply instructions: You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email using any one of the following methods: * Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client, and reply-to-all from there: mbox Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style * Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to switches of git-send-email(1): git send-email \ --in-reply-to=bug-107692-4-4Km9j54NVE@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/ \ --to=gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org \ --cc=gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org \ /path/to/YOUR_REPLY https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html * If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header via mailto: links, try the mailto: linkBe sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox; as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).