public inbox for gcc-bugs@sourceware.org help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org> To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org Subject: [Bug tree-optimization/108601] [13 Regression] vector peeling ICEs with PGO + LTO + IPA inlining in gcc_r in SPEC2017 Date: Tue, 31 Jan 2023 07:25:27 +0000 [thread overview] Message-ID: <bug-108601-4-S8mHwJroyh@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/> (raw) In-Reply-To: <bug-108601-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108601 Richard Biener <rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |liuhongt at gcc dot gnu.org, | |rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment #2 from Richard Biener <rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org> --- To me it's obvious that the path in the backtrace gets a non-constant niter bump since we're dealing with epilog peeling. Either we need to reject this when requiring a peeled epilogue or we should deal with a non-constant skip_niters. This was introduced with r13-2503-gc13223b790bbc5. Btw, I wonder why we need to use this function instead of re-using the IV from the vectorized loop (or extracting the "last" value from the vectorized variant). It should be possible to construct a testcase with a vectorizable non-linear IV that requires peeling of the epilog?
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2023-01-31 7:25 UTC|newest] Thread overview: 17+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top 2023-01-30 15:43 [Bug tree-optimization/108601] New: " tnfchris at gcc dot gnu.org 2023-01-30 16:05 ` [Bug tree-optimization/108601] " pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org 2023-01-31 7:25 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org [this message] 2023-01-31 7:29 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org 2023-01-31 7:49 ` crazylht at gmail dot com 2023-01-31 8:28 ` crazylht at gmail dot com 2023-01-31 9:05 ` tnfchris at gcc dot gnu.org 2023-01-31 20:24 ` [Bug tree-optimization/108601] [13 Regression] vector peeling ICEs with VLA in gcc_r in SPEC2017 since g:c13223b790bbc5e4a3f5605e057eac59b61b2c85 tnfchris at gcc dot gnu.org 2023-01-31 21:08 ` tnfchris at gcc dot gnu.org 2023-02-01 5:32 ` crazylht at gmail dot com 2023-02-01 7:29 ` crazylht at gmail dot com 2023-02-01 7:32 ` rguenther at suse dot de 2023-02-01 7:46 ` crazylht at gmail dot com 2023-02-01 8:41 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org 2023-02-01 9:07 ` crazylht at gmail dot com 2023-02-02 9:02 ` cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org 2023-02-03 8:05 ` rguenth 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-108601-4-S8mHwJroyh@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).