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 BBD133858D38; Thu, 28 Dec 2023 04:46:43 +0000 (GMT)
DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 sourceware.org BBD133858D38
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gcc.gnu.org;
	s=default; t=1703738803;
	bh=bK6PtkeecAriB/GYDWSIQlEwW/sMgF7aCNPdQh54am8=;
	h=From:To:Subject:Date:In-Reply-To:References:From;
	b=WNkR+K77pZ8KH2uBsoeS4rlLHPCg+P3U5FUSrFiFCxeZZZwGDOJmupl298oD9VqtZ
	 QhO0mTVwk8VzsmqaaPgQKxHeUCzCVN50YKdsO781BSJU3Ed4g+G8lftLYXurD5rquI
	 GRPxfHqw5P4RbdtBBj5XcG/Ga8cRIKNwJ6snz8V8=
From: "juzhe.zhong at rivai dot ai" <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 04:46:42 +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: juzhe.zhong at rivai dot ai
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-zz6E7kwbPB@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 #12 from JuzheZhong <juzhe.zhong at rivai dot ai> ---
(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 SV=
E.
> > > >=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 as =
follows:
> > > >=20
> > > > new_mask =3D 00011111
> > > > new_data =3D 87654321
> > > >=20
> > > > Then use the EXTRACT_LAST, we will get value =3D 1 for early break.
> > > >=20
> > > > Am I right ?
> > >=20
> > > Yeah, the idea being the scalar loop will then run from 1 to 6 to do =
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 entirely =
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 elem=
ent 0
> > ?
> >=20
> > Since for ARM SVE loop mask is generated by whilelo instructions, it al=
ways
> > set
> > mask bit from 0 to the last active element - 1.
>=20
> sure, but you can't use BIT_FIELD_REF on VLA vectors.

So, for length partial vector. We can use VEC_EXTRACT with index =3D 0 since
VEC_EXTRACT optab allows VLA vectors now for length target.=