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 8F6203858281; Tue, 19 Mar 2024 17:13:25 +0000 (GMT)
DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 sourceware.org 8F6203858281
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gcc.gnu.org;
	s=default; t=1710868405;
	bh=xNovnsn2hG1qpVJcL+0Na/RDr7lyUTMToxbLe4ubzqo=;
	h=From:To:Subject:Date:In-Reply-To:References:From;
	b=jPQ7lLo9rBtDNIUPF07MisIg6veoGVZjst9vTsQEEntxMVvIALQLAzYAUHFdGUAui
	 up+5O+bN+OJnii16M00OJ4N6YKHS6CUTSYQCwJrYimBEwNEnHcSG5L+2y0Xa4AMsDN
	 xEnWkY48RnO77I/3oTTPEhv87iY63MfY66IjoJfc=
From: "avieira at gcc dot gnu.org" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug target/112787] Codegen regression of large GCC vector
 extensions when enabling SVE
Date: Tue, 19 Mar 2024 17:13:24 +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: avieira at gcc dot gnu.org
X-Bugzilla-Status: REOPENED
X-Bugzilla-Resolution: 
X-Bugzilla-Priority: P3
X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: avieira at gcc dot gnu.org
X-Bugzilla-Target-Milestone: 14.0
X-Bugzilla-Flags: 
X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields: 
Message-ID: <bug-112787-4-PH4IRshJCN@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-112787-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
References: <bug-112787-4@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=3D112787

--- Comment #10 from avieira at gcc dot gnu.org ---
First of all, apologies for this! I don't know why I didn't test this on x8=
6_64
too, I usually do for such backports.

Anyway I checked locally and backporting:=20
r14-2821-gd1c072a1c3411a6fe29900750b38210af8451eeb seems to be enough for
gcc-12, I'm testing it on gcc-13 and running full regression tests on both
x86_64 and aarch64 and will get back to you.

@Andrew what made you think we also needed r14-2985-g04aa0edcace22a ? Not to
say we may not want to backport it, but just trying to figure out why it's
needed for this particular case.=