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 0794F384F4B2; Fri, 18 Nov 2022 13:35:32 +0000 (GMT)
DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 sourceware.org 0794F384F4B2
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gcc.gnu.org;
	s=default; t=1668778532;
	bh=QZa93GVCIaUIOYrV7c3zISjQlXOxF3dMeK+rYX10Obg=;
	h=From:To:Subject:Date:In-Reply-To:References:From;
	b=Z54G9zWyjT0RXaBxILszXSmXBzmYatU/xdLVpkModLxUBoySDlK3s/fDzoGFAlaUo
	 OTLvw9PsLvsEevdE3aJ+vZr6TrngCF6kQBKCDb+m66lhD97BXKZ7Jn2LmwlL+HX8mW
	 jpWFKJokkDy1ETy5Ti7M2DpvhpDo0FyhTunQk74I=
From: "guojiufu 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 13:35:30 +0000
X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC
X-Bugzilla-Type: changed
X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None
X-Bugzilla-Product: gcc
X-Bugzilla-Component: target
X-Bugzilla-Version: 13.0
X-Bugzilla-Keywords: testsuite-fail
X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal
X-Bugzilla-Who: guojiufu at gcc dot gnu.org
X-Bugzilla-Status: UNCONFIRMED
X-Bugzilla-Resolution: 
X-Bugzilla-Priority: P1
X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
X-Bugzilla-Target-Milestone: 13.0
X-Bugzilla-Flags: 
X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields: 
Message-ID: <bug-107692-4-HqLbqm9Uth@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-107692-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
References: <bug-107692-4@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=3D107692

--- Comment #7 from Jiu Fu Guo <guojiufu at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
(In reply to Hongyu Wang from comment #6)
> (In reply to Jiu Fu Guo from comment #4)
> cut...
>=20
> Yes, I've already posted the patch at
> https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2022-November/606478.html

One minor finding:=20
Like -munroll-only-small-loops on other targets(e.g. rs6000, r13-3950 inten=
ds
to enable unrolling and uses this option to control the unroll factor accor=
ding
to the loop size.  Compare with the previous logic(e.g. for rs6000), the ne=
w=20
logic will cause:=20
-fno-unroll-loops may be unable to prevent rtl_unroll_loops from running, b=
ut
loop_unroll_adjust will return 1 to prevent the loop to be unrolled.=20
So, there may be side-effects on "slight compiling time" and
"dump-file may be generated with the message of failing to unroll".=