From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: by sourceware.org (Postfix, from userid 48) id 503D2385829E; Wed, 7 Feb 2024 13:28:04 +0000 (GMT) DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 sourceware.org 503D2385829E DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gcc.gnu.org; s=default; t=1707312484; bh=f/7r84cYHw9bUrTHrTbWd2ZEOz/f9pxZRs4U43y54MU=; h=From:To:Subject:Date:In-Reply-To:References:From; b=EG3wwNgTe+4CXOI/HgeOkJnxNtNyd+QSfSjjshhGrjTZkUM5P0pK1ykhaX8VsUO+G sdWQQPK8Hp46EJPkE/blMIryUhO4lXAuDtPNyKCIUKDuptcnLe/DGrdUOHq6o+jMJn 0Za6Z40CXK8Th6HrjnGuJi8UGBK1B5hFc1i0EOjY= From: "rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org" To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org Subject: [Bug tree-optimization/113808] [14 Regression] FAIL: libgomp.fortran/non-rectangular-loop-1.f90 Date: Wed, 07 Feb 2024 13:28:03 +0000 X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC X-Bugzilla-Type: changed X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None X-Bugzilla-Product: gcc X-Bugzilla-Component: tree-optimization X-Bugzilla-Version: 14.0 X-Bugzilla-Keywords: wrong-code X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal X-Bugzilla-Who: rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org X-Bugzilla-Status: UNCONFIRMED X-Bugzilla-Resolution: X-Bugzilla-Priority: P3 X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org X-Bugzilla-Target-Milestone: 14.0 X-Bugzilla-Flags: X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields: target_milestone keywords cc Message-ID: In-Reply-To: References: 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: https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3D113808 Richard Biener changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Target Milestone|--- |14.0 Keywords| |wrong-code CC| |tnfchris at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment #1 from Richard Biener --- The error must be for the continuation of 'k' to the scalar loop where we h= ave [local count: 829590381]: MEM [(integer(kind=3D4) *)&D.4344] =3D vect_vec_iv_.27_95; vect_k.32_118 =3D vect_vec_iv_.27_95 + { 1, 1, 1, 1 }; k.4_23 =3D k.4_55 + 1;=20 ivtmp_120 =3D ivtmp_119 + 1; if (ivtmp_120 < bnd.23_89) goto ; [85.44%] else goto ; [14.56%] [local count: 136777259]: # k.4_45 =3D PHI # ivtmp_76 =3D PHI # vect_vec_iv_.27_99 =3D PHI # vect__19.29_108 =3D PHI <{ 0, 1, 2, 3 }(5)> _109 =3D BIT_FIELD_REF ; _48 =3D _109; _100 =3D BIT_FIELD_REF ; k.4_43 =3D _100; niters_vector_mult_vf.24_90 =3D bnd.23_89 << 2; tmp.26_93 =3D 53 - niters_vector_mult_vf.24_90; _92 =3D (integer(kind=3D4)) niters_vector_mult_vf.24_90; tmp.25_91 =3D _92 + 1; if (niters.22_12 =3D=3D niters_vector_mult_vf.24_90) goto ; [25.00%] else goto ; [75.00%] [local count: 136777259]: # k.4_74 =3D PHI # ivtmp_77 =3D PHI but I can't really see anything wrong here (besides redundant code). It's possible to elide the middle loop, but I failed to emulate the inner loop how it's presented without -fopenmp-simd.=