public inbox for gcc-bugs@sourceware.org
help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "tnfchris at gcc dot gnu.org" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug middle-end/113163] [14 Regression][GCN] ICE in vect_peel_nonlinear_iv_init, at tree-vect-loop.cc:9420
Date: Tue, 02 Jan 2024 11:35:34 +0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <bug-113163-4-6D1geBUFFP@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <bug-113163-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113163

--- Comment #12 from Tamar Christina <tnfchris at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
(In reply to Andrew Stubbs from comment #11)
> (In reply to Tamar Christina from comment #7)
> > This seems to happen because the vectorizer decides to use partial vectors
> > to vectorize the loop and the target picks a nonlinear induction step which
> > we can't support for early breaks.
> 
> In which hook is this selected?
> 
> I'm not aware of this being a deliberate choice we made...

I haven't looked into why on the target we get a nonlinear induction (mostly
because I don't know much about the target). I however wasn't able to reproduce
it on SVE and x86_64 even when forcing partial vectors.

So I guess it's more accurate to say "something about the target" is making the
vectorizer pick a nonlinear induction.  most likely missing support for
something.

Note that the testcase does work if partial vectors is turned off. So It should
work fine if the vectorizer retries without partial vectors.

waiting for Richi to come back from holiday to review the patch and should be
fixed.

  parent reply	other threads:[~2024-01-02 11:35 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 16+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2023-12-28 11:37 [Bug middle-end/113163] New: " burnus at gcc dot gnu.org
2023-12-28 11:53 ` [Bug middle-end/113163] " tnfchris at gcc dot gnu.org
2023-12-28 12:20 ` burnus at gcc dot gnu.org
2023-12-28 12:22 ` tnfchris at gcc dot gnu.org
2023-12-28 12:25 ` tnfchris at gcc dot gnu.org
2023-12-28 12:27 ` burnus at gcc dot gnu.org
2023-12-28 12:30 ` burnus at gcc dot gnu.org
2023-12-28 14:20 ` tnfchris at gcc dot gnu.org
2023-12-28 14:20 ` tnfchris at gcc dot gnu.org
2023-12-29 14:48 ` tnfchris at gcc dot gnu.org
2023-12-29 21:06 ` tnfchris at gcc dot gnu.org
2024-01-02 11:29 ` ams at gcc dot gnu.org
2024-01-02 11:35 ` tnfchris at gcc dot gnu.org [this message]
2024-01-06  6:14 ` pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org
2024-01-09 11:18 ` cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org
2024-01-09 11:25 ` tnfchris at gcc dot gnu.org

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-113163-4-6D1geBUFFP@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: link
Be 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).