From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: by sourceware.org (Postfix, from userid 48) id 286833856DF2; Wed, 17 May 2023 06:46:55 +0000 (GMT) DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 sourceware.org 286833856DF2 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gcc.gnu.org; s=default; t=1684306015; bh=UXK9Mz+OCbdMP327cx+MggfZVsPtQhj139MvqkSwlvQ=; h=From:To:Subject:Date:In-Reply-To:References:From; b=nqSOBYxYeCwPRmV1kBzZjCDXAg5EwnWsI9iB/HM2bn5XgfLi2dYgbXL26cLp7GNuf BC/g91fYN/In3f0HNlXnIYzy+WlNHOTOuYMkOzxUoTXK5j8a4EqyyYhYjB1VTkj/MX WHXIIQAl9xuq2zEHV3Vvfq2LOZzFUq1aGGlz5EN8= From: "rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org" To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org Subject: [Bug tree-optimization/109862] IV-OPTs could use int but still uses smaller sized for IV Date: Wed, 17 May 2023 06:46:54 +0000 X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC X-Bugzilla-Type: changed X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None X-Bugzilla-Product: gcc X-Bugzilla-Component: tree-optimization X-Bugzilla-Version: 14.0 X-Bugzilla-Keywords: missed-optimization X-Bugzilla-Severity: enhancement X-Bugzilla-Who: rguenth 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: --- X-Bugzilla-Flags: X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields: Message-ID: In-Reply-To: References: 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: https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3D109862 --- Comment #1 from Richard Biener --- I think IVOPTs never considers candidates of different size. One could use niter info to bound the value range (or use ranger) and add a candidate bas= ed on that. But you have to be careful with targets that cannot do sub-word arithmetic efficiently.=