public inbox for gcc-bugs@sourceware.org help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "rsandifo at gcc dot gnu.org" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org> To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org Subject: [Bug tree-optimization/113441] [14 Regression] Fail to fold the last element with multiple loop since g:2efe3a7de0107618397264017fb045f237764cc7 Date: Mon, 04 Mar 2024 13:26:27 +0000 [thread overview] Message-ID: <bug-113441-4-KALOOUYjRL@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/> (raw) In-Reply-To: <bug-113441-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113441 --- Comment #36 from Richard Sandiford <rsandifo at gcc dot gnu.org> --- Created attachment 57602 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=57602&action=edit proof-of-concept patch to suppress peeling for gaps This patch does what I suggested in the previous comment: if the loop needs peeling for gaps, try again without that, and pick the better loop. It seems to restore the original style of code for SVE. A more polished version would be a bit smarter about when to retry. E.g. it's pointless if the main loop already operates on full vectors (i.e. if peeling 1 iteration is natural in any case). Perhaps the condition should be that either (a) the number of epilogue iterations is known to be equal to the VF of the main loop or (b) the target is known to support partial vectors for the loop's vector_mode. Any thoughts?
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2024-03-04 13:26 UTC|newest] Thread overview: 48+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top 2024-01-17 12:38 [Bug c/113441] New: [14 Regression] Fail to fold the last element with multiple loop juzhe.zhong at rivai dot ai 2024-01-17 12:45 ` [Bug tree-optimization/113441] " juzhe.zhong at rivai dot ai 2024-01-17 13:22 ` [Bug tree-optimization/113441] [13/14 " rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org 2024-01-17 14:07 ` juzhe.zhong at rivai dot ai 2024-01-17 14:35 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org 2024-01-22 12:38 ` juzhe.zhong at rivai dot ai 2024-01-22 12:41 ` tnfchris at gcc dot gnu.org 2024-01-22 12:42 ` juzhe.zhong at rivai dot ai 2024-01-22 13:19 ` juzhe.zhong at rivai dot ai 2024-01-22 13:52 ` [Bug tree-optimization/113441] [14 " rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org 2024-01-22 16:16 ` tnfchris at gcc dot gnu.org 2024-01-22 22:16 ` juzhe.zhong at rivai dot ai 2024-01-23 6:42 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org 2024-01-23 8:15 ` juzhe.zhong at rivai dot ai 2024-01-23 8:17 ` rguenther at suse dot de 2024-01-23 8:25 ` juzhe.zhong at rivai dot ai 2024-01-23 10:29 ` rguenther at suse dot de 2024-01-23 10:30 ` tnfchris at gcc dot gnu.org 2024-01-23 12:32 ` tnfchris at gcc dot gnu.org 2024-01-23 12:50 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org 2024-01-23 12:52 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org 2024-01-23 12:56 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org 2024-01-23 13:02 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org 2024-01-23 13:05 ` tnfchris at gcc dot gnu.org 2024-01-23 13:12 ` tnfchris at gcc dot gnu.org 2024-01-23 13:21 ` juzhe.zhong at rivai dot ai 2024-01-23 13:28 ` tnfchris at gcc dot gnu.org 2024-02-22 16:18 ` [Bug tree-optimization/113441] [14 Regression] Fail to fold the last element with multiple loop since g:2efe3a7de0107618397264017fb045f237764cc7 tnfchris at gcc dot gnu.org 2024-02-26 8:10 ` tnfchris at gcc dot gnu.org 2024-02-26 8:17 ` rguenther at suse dot de 2024-02-27 8:01 ` tnfchris at gcc dot gnu.org 2024-02-27 8:08 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org 2024-02-29 22:18 ` rsandifo at gcc dot gnu.org 2024-03-01 9:44 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org 2024-03-01 9:53 ` rsandifo at gcc dot gnu.org 2024-03-01 10:44 ` rguenther at suse dot de 2024-03-04 12:07 ` rsandifo at gcc dot gnu.org 2024-03-04 13:26 ` rsandifo at gcc dot gnu.org [this message] 2024-03-04 14:28 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org 2024-03-04 14:48 ` rsandifo at gcc dot gnu.org 2024-03-04 15:01 ` rsandifo at gcc dot gnu.org 2024-03-04 15:10 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org 2024-03-04 16:16 ` rsandifo at gcc dot gnu.org 2024-03-04 22:52 ` rsandifo at gcc dot gnu.org 2024-03-05 8:21 ` rguenther at suse dot de 2024-03-05 10:44 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org 2024-03-07 20:50 ` law at gcc dot gnu.org 2024-05-07 7:43 ` [Bug tree-optimization/113441] [14/15 " rguenth 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-113441-4-KALOOUYjRL@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).