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 ED7C73858D32; Thu, 28 Dec 2023 04:49:09 +0000 (GMT)
DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 sourceware.org ED7C73858D32
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gcc.gnu.org;
	s=default; t=1703738949;
	bh=oqFi4xjz3HX7Nq3YcJaJz+kRAO69vuyKpvoaWHQCZks=;
	h=From:To:Subject:Date:In-Reply-To:References:From;
	b=Rscr2Lc8SZ2/iW+y8Tn6dhXvYGD8EWiukjxKCwtJ3zjSJ48yTupxf9fMgux1vzmom
	 t+sMcKtaNXo002QVvbAKwQk3ZrSs6FdARWSMJvW+NXWly09y+6NEhYRa2SuZKVm0GJ
	 nkAe4tTcxY7c5N7xy1HyiGXpZQyNc7jGcGy2Qhow=
From: "tnfchris at gcc dot gnu.org" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug c/113134] gcc does not version loops with early break
 conditions that don't have side-effects
Date: Thu, 28 Dec 2023 04:49:09 +0000
X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC
X-Bugzilla-Type: changed
X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None
X-Bugzilla-Product: gcc
X-Bugzilla-Component: c
X-Bugzilla-Version: 14.0
X-Bugzilla-Keywords: missed-optimization
X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal
X-Bugzilla-Who: tnfchris 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: ---
X-Bugzilla-Flags: 
X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields: 
Message-ID: <bug-113134-4-gYtoY7Szoz@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-113134-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
References: <bug-113134-4@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=3D113134

--- Comment #13 from Tamar Christina <tnfchris at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
(In reply to JuzheZhong from comment #12)
> (In reply to Tamar Christina from comment #11)
> > (In reply to JuzheZhong from comment #10)
> > > (In reply to Tamar Christina from comment #9)
> > > > (In reply to JuzheZhong from comment #8)
> > > > > Suppose the loop mask is generated by whilelo instruction of ARM =
SVE.
> > > > >=20
> > > > > Suppose we have 8 elements in a single whole vector.
> > > > >=20
> > > > > mask =3D whilo (0, res) if res =3D 6, then mask =3D 11111000.
> > > > > data =3D 12345678
> > > > >=20
> > > > > Then if it is early break. You are reversing both data and mask a=
s follows:
> > > > >=20
> > > > > new_mask =3D 00011111
> > > > > new_data =3D 87654321
> > > > >=20
> > > > > Then use the EXTRACT_LAST, we will get value =3D 1 for early brea=
k.
> > > > >=20
> > > > > Am I right ?
> > > >=20
> > > > Yeah, the idea being the scalar loop will then run from 1 to 6 to d=
o any
> > > > side effects that we couldn't apply.
> > > >=20
> > > > We went with this approach first because it works for non-masked
> > > > architectures too. In GCC-15 we'll try to implement staying entirel=
y inside
> > > > a vector loop by splitting the mask in elements until first active =
and
> > > > element from first active so we can correctly mask the operations.
> > >=20
> > > Ok. For the current approach. Isn't it the first element is always el=
ement 0
> > > ?
> > >=20
> > > Since for ARM SVE loop mask is generated by whilelo instructions, it =
always
> > > set
> > > mask bit from 0 to the last active element - 1.
> >=20
> > sure, but you can't use BIT_FIELD_REF on VLA vectors.
>=20
> So, for length partial vector. We can use VEC_EXTRACT with index =3D 0 si=
nce
> VEC_EXTRACT optab allows VLA vectors now for length target.

Sounds good :)=