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 5F79C3858CD1; Mon, 11 Dec 2023 15:34:50 +0000 (GMT)
DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 sourceware.org 5F79C3858CD1
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gcc.gnu.org;
	s=default; t=1702308890;
	bh=w3DR30VoAzwG8+YSv0Um4Re0u49OvPJhI2PVXQAwg+Y=;
	h=From:To:Subject:Date:In-Reply-To:References:From;
	b=JBKTy0yafYrMVds/VNqKQDTvyt5P2jxHVjupb58ggfDN2oRXO7xTlAt9O4mKrvk8b
	 ePcKxIa3ZA7+UF+bTykTwSKpqN1tefBXQO+IXYEEZ9opDR0QiZyvRfbem82xNGHJTo
	 Lth5/e5KA9Sk+srkuSL+kMlYirHawYOjtF3Tcjkw=
From: "pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug tree-optimization/112961] [13/14 Regression] middle-end Missed
 vectorization: failed to vectorize simple reduction max since GCC-13
Date: Mon, 11 Dec 2023 15:34:50 +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: normal
X-Bugzilla-Who: pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org
X-Bugzilla-Status: NEW
X-Bugzilla-Resolution: 
X-Bugzilla-Priority: P3
X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
X-Bugzilla-Target-Milestone: 13.3
X-Bugzilla-Flags: 
X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields: everconfirmed bug_status cf_reconfirmed_on
Message-ID: <bug-112961-4-9nyk3WUCes@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-112961-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
References: <bug-112961-4@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=3D112961

Andrew Pinski <pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
     Ever confirmed|0                           |1
             Status|UNCONFIRMED                 |NEW
   Last reconfirmed|                            |2023-12-11

--- Comment #2 from Andrew Pinski <pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
Confirmed.

The difference in IR is minor but causes the confusion:

  _29 =3D MAX_EXPR <_16, prephitmp_18>;
  prephitmp_23 =3D _29;

vs:
  prephitmp_23 =3D MAX_EXPR <_16, prephitmp_18>;=