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 6C76F3858C2B; Tue,  5 Dec 2023 14:39:30 +0000 (GMT)
DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 sourceware.org 6C76F3858C2B
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gcc.gnu.org;
	s=default; t=1701787170;
	bh=y3fLtIp12UywKel5WUtfNyVm2rFdct/daRKXU931+Qc=;
	h=From:To:Subject:Date:In-Reply-To:References:From;
	b=rR2iYqANWh2FAWI75ZZlSwQwNxOb7lYMVP5FWwlu5cl00ur7AZHcwagl7VGDiKa2A
	 mlaLN5xhDg/eWpFSp12M0LxM87sqvI6xEIdBrUKK+ASo4sZ6oNzkhawSnk1ccxwRMX
	 NHnqr4pBD9y9QIRTxhRqMs974s4Smkf7ixQY+nps=
From: "rdapp at gcc dot gnu.org" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug target/112853] RISC-V: RVV: SPEC2017 525.x264 regression
Date: Tue, 05 Dec 2023 14:39:30 +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: 14.0
X-Bugzilla-Keywords: wrong-code
X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal
X-Bugzilla-Who: rdapp 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: <bug-112853-4-gcsLZtJyXT@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-112853-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
References: <bug-112853-4@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=3D112853

--- Comment #6 from Robin Dapp <rdapp at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
I indeed see more failures with _zvl128b, vlen=3D256 (than with _zvl128b,
vlen=3D128):

FAIL: gcc.dg/vect/pr66251.c -flto -ffat-lto-objects execution test
FAIL: gcc.dg/vect/pr66251.c execution test
FAIL: gcc.dg/vect/pr66253.c -flto -ffat-lto-objects execution test
FAIL: gcc.dg/vect/pr66253.c execution test
FAIL: gcc.dg/vect/slp-46.c -flto -ffat-lto-objects execution test
FAIL: gcc.dg/vect/slp-46.c execution test
FAIL: gcc.dg/vect/vect-alias-check-10.c -flto -ffat-lto-objects execution t=
est
FAIL: gcc.dg/vect/vect-alias-check-10.c execution test
FAIL: gcc.dg/vect/vect-alias-check-11.c -flto -ffat-lto-objects execution t=
est
FAIL: gcc.dg/vect/vect-alias-check-11.c execution test
FAIL: gcc.dg/vect/vect-alias-check-12.c -flto -ffat-lto-objects execution t=
est
FAIL: gcc.dg/vect/vect-alias-check-12.c execution test
FAIL: gcc.dg/vect/vect-alias-check-18.c -flto -ffat-lto-objects execution t=
est
FAIL: gcc.dg/vect/vect-alias-check-18.c execution test

FAIL: gfortran.dg/array_constructor_4.f90   -O1  execution test
FAIL: gfortran.dg/associate_18.f08   -O1  execution test
FAIL: gfortran.dg/vector_subscript_8.f90   -O1  execution test
FAIL: gfortran.dg/vector_subscript_8.f90   -O2  execution test
FAIL: gfortran.dg/vector_subscript_8.f90   -O3 -fomit-frame-pointer
-funroll-loops -fpeel-loops -ftracer -finline-functions  execution test
FAIL: gfortran.dg/vector_subscript_8.f90   -O3 -g  execution test

FAIL: gfortran.fortran-torture/execute/in-pack.f90 execution,  -O1
FAIL: gfortran.fortran-torture/execute/in-pack.f90 execution,  -O2
FAIL: gfortran.fortran-torture/execute/in-pack.f90 execution,  -O2
-fbounds-check
FAIL: gfortran.fortran-torture/execute/in-pack.f90 execution,  -O2
-fomit-frame-pointer -finline-functions
FAIL: gfortran.fortran-torture/execute/in-pack.f90 execution,  -O2
-fomit-frame-pointer -finline-functions -funroll-loops
FAIL: gfortran.fortran-torture/execute/in-pack.f90 execution,  -O3 -g

Maybe those can give a hint.=