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/113441] [14 Regression] Fail to fold the last element with multiple loop
Date: Tue, 23 Jan 2024 13:21:19 +0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <bug-113441-4-mC2c7uqphT@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 #24 from JuzheZhong <juzhe.zhong at rivai dot ai> ---
(In reply to Richard Biener from comment #19)
> (In reply to Richard Biener from comment #18)
> > (In reply to Tamar Christina from comment #17)
> > > Ok, bisected to
> > > 
> > > g:2efe3a7de0107618397264017fb045f237764cc7 is the first bad commit
> > > commit 2efe3a7de0107618397264017fb045f237764cc7
> > > Author: Hao Liu <hliu@os.amperecomputing.com>
> > > Date:   Wed Dec 6 14:52:19 2023 +0800
> > > 
> > >     tree-optimization/112774: extend the SCEV CHREC tree with a nonwrapping
> > > flag
> > > 
> > > Before this commit we were unable to analyse the stride of the access.
> > > After this niters seems to estimate the loop trip count at 4 and after that
> > > the logs diverge enormously.
> > 
> > Hum, but that's backward and would match to what I said in comment#2 - we
> > should get better code with that.
> > 
> > Juzhe - when you revert the above ontop of trunk does the generated code
> > look better for Risc-V?
> 
> It doesn't revert but you can do
> 
> diff --git a/gcc/tree-scalar-evolution.cc b/gcc/tree-scalar-evolution.cc
> index 25e3130e2f1..7870c8d76fb 100644
> --- a/gcc/tree-scalar-evolution.cc
> +++ b/gcc/tree-scalar-evolution.cc
> @@ -2054,7 +2054,7 @@ analyze_scalar_evolution (class loop *loop, tree var)
>  
>  void record_nonwrapping_chrec (tree chrec)
>  {
> -  CHREC_NOWRAP(chrec) = 1;
> +  CHREC_NOWRAP(chrec) = 0;
>  
>    if (dump_file && (dump_flags & TDF_SCEV))
>      {

Hmmm. With experiments. The codegen looks slightly better but still didn't
recover back to GCC-12.


Btw, I compare ARM SVE codegen, even with cost model:

https://godbolt.org/z/cKc1PG3dv

I think GCC 13.2 codegen is better than GCC trunk with cost model.

  parent reply	other threads:[~2024-01-23 13:21 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 48+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2024-01-17 12:38 [Bug c/113441] New: " 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 [this message]
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
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-mC2c7uqphT@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).