From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: by sourceware.org (Postfix, from userid 48) id DF0E53858D3C; Fri, 26 May 2023 05:28:08 +0000 (GMT) DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 sourceware.org DF0E53858D3C DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gcc.gnu.org; s=default; t=1685078888; bh=1KO6nJc8/SGd9X7ihCqIlX4JT6kw4f34y1yXd6Db/LY=; h=From:To:Subject:Date:In-Reply-To:References:From; b=Zdlrg3bbPcEJYmP64tBNUofXKbegovlN8bRr3aGjLUrq8ttMApuFjnZGIufeFJKbZ qkVDe0DoDEYgmHfyarI1AmJIGBcdt7UD4HdmzeBt52FO8l7gs9SsCqTHm/cXvopSjx 2RliWxgqFA9Yg7NsKKQZpEY7HoWMWS2+lGRNY++U= From: "juzhe.zhong at rivai dot ai" To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org Subject: [Bug target/109971] [14 regression] Several powerpc64 vector test cases fail after r14-1242-gf574e2dfae7905 Date: Fri, 26 May 2023 05:28:08 +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: 14.0 X-Bugzilla-Keywords: X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal X-Bugzilla-Who: juzhe.zhong at rivai dot ai X-Bugzilla-Status: ASSIGNED X-Bugzilla-Resolution: X-Bugzilla-Priority: P3 X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: linkw 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=3D109971 --- Comment #6 from JuzheZhong --- >> With decrement IV, the optimized IR actually becomes better, it also ali= gns >>with our discussion here: https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2= 023->>April/615629.html (Thanks for the improvement!) Oh, I see. It seems that my patch is overall beneficial to PowerPC? That's what I want since I want my patch can not only help RVV but also other targets. >>It exposes something inefficient at -O2, it seems we can teach cunroll fu= rther >>about this kind of new sequence. Ok, we can optimize it for decrement IV in the future. >>If you meant to disable decrement IV on Power (but now actually enable it= >>unexpectedly), then probably we can just keep it (not disabling), for Po= wer we >>mainly adopt --param=3Dvect-partial-vector-usage=3D1, it shouldn't= be affected, for >>--param=3Dvect-partial-vector-usage=3D2, it does genera= te better code sequence for >>most cases and we can improve the remaining w= orse one gradually. I am not meant to disable decrement IV on Power. Actually, I really hope Po= wer can reuse the flow that I build for RVV. It makes things more meaningful. If it works for power and it seems to improve power codegen in most cases, = I'd like to see power enable it by default. Then we can optimize it togther. Thanks a lot for your information.=