public inbox for gcc-bugs@sourceware.org help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "juzhe.zhong at rivai dot ai" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org> To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org Subject: [Bug tree-optimization/113134] gcc does not version loops with early break conditions that don't have side-effects Date: Fri, 02 Feb 2024 03:38:54 +0000 [thread overview] Message-ID: <bug-113134-4-tCkmN8qUBw@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/> (raw) In-Reply-To: <bug-113134-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113134 --- Comment #21 from JuzheZhong <juzhe.zhong at rivai dot ai> --- Hi, Richard. I looked into ivcanon. I found that: /* If the loop has more than one exit, try checking all of them for # of iterations determinable through scev. */ if (!exit) niter = find_loop_niter (loop, &exit); In find_loop_niter, we iterate 2 exit edges: 1. bb 5 -> bb 6 with niter = (unsigned int) N_13(D). 2. bb 3 -> bb 6 with niter = 1001. It just skip niter = (unsigned int) N_13(D) in: if (!integer_zerop (desc.may_be_zero)) continue; find_loop_niter (loop, &exit) return 1001 with skipping (unsigned int) N_13(D). Should it return MIN (1001, (unsigned int) N_13(D)). I prefer fix it in ivcanon since I believe it would be more elegant than fix it in loop splitter. I am still investigating, any guides will be really appreciated. Thanks.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2024-02-02 3:38 UTC|newest] Thread overview: 24+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top 2023-12-25 11:29 [Bug c/113134] New: Middle end early break vectorization: Fail to vectorize a simple early break code juzhe.zhong at rivai dot ai 2023-12-25 12:35 ` [Bug c/113134] " tnfchris at gcc dot gnu.org 2023-12-27 15:21 ` [Bug c/113134] gcc does not version loops with side-effect early breaks tnfchris at gcc dot gnu.org 2023-12-28 1:21 ` [Bug c/113134] gcc does not version loops with early break conditions that don't have side-effects juzhe.zhong at rivai dot ai 2023-12-28 3:48 ` tnfchris at gcc dot gnu.org 2023-12-28 3:55 ` juzhe.zhong at rivai dot ai 2023-12-28 4:02 ` tnfchris at gcc dot gnu.org 2023-12-28 4:05 ` tnfchris at gcc dot gnu.org 2023-12-28 4:23 ` juzhe.zhong at rivai dot ai 2023-12-28 4:30 ` tnfchris at gcc dot gnu.org 2023-12-28 4:35 ` juzhe.zhong at rivai dot ai 2023-12-28 4:45 ` tnfchris at gcc dot gnu.org 2023-12-28 4:46 ` juzhe.zhong at rivai dot ai 2023-12-28 4:49 ` tnfchris at gcc dot gnu.org 2023-12-28 4:51 ` juzhe.zhong at rivai dot ai 2023-12-28 4:53 ` tnfchris at gcc dot gnu.org 2023-12-28 5:08 ` tnfchris at gcc dot gnu.org 2023-12-28 9:11 ` juzhe.zhong at rivai dot ai 2023-12-28 21:20 ` [Bug tree-optimization/113134] " pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org 2024-01-08 8:11 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org 2024-01-31 11:48 ` juzhe.zhong at rivai dot ai 2024-01-31 12:04 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org 2024-02-02 3:38 ` juzhe.zhong at rivai dot ai [this message] 2024-02-02 8:49 ` juzhe.zhong at rivai dot ai
Reply instructions: You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email using any one of the following methods: * Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client, and reply-to-all from there: mbox Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style * Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to switches of git-send-email(1): git send-email \ --in-reply-to=bug-113134-4-tCkmN8qUBw@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/ \ --to=gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org \ --cc=gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org \ /path/to/YOUR_REPLY https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html * If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header via mailto: links, try the mailto: linkBe sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox; as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).