public inbox for gcc-bugs@sourceware.org
help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug tree-optimization/32075]  New: can't determine dependence between p->a[x+i] and p->a[x+i+1] where x is invariant but defined in the function
Date: Thu, 24 May 2007 21:56:00 -0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <bug-32075-6528@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/> (raw)

While looking into some failures on the pointer plus branch after fixing up
forwprop, I noticed that we would get a failure in the vectorizer testsuite and
the reason is because we no longer could determine dependence for the two data
accesses.

Here is the testcase which is a modified version of vect-102.c which gets us
the same IR as what the pointer plus branch gives:
/* { dg-require-effective-target vect_int } */

#include <stdlib.h>
#include <stdarg.h>
#include "tree-vect.h"

#define N 9

struct extraction
{
  int a[N];
  int b[N];
};

static int a[N] = {1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9};
static int b[N] = {2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,9};

int main1 (int x, int y) {
  int i;
  unsigned x1 = x;  
  struct extraction *p;
  p = (struct extraction *) malloc (sizeof (struct extraction));

  for (i = 0; i < N; i++)
    {
       p->a[i] = a[i];
       if (x == 135)
         abort (); /* to avoid vectorization  */
    }

  /* Not vectorizable: distance 1.  */
  for (i = 0; i < N - 1; i++)
    {
       p->a[x1 + i] = p->a[x1 + i + 1];
    }

  /* check results: */
  for (i = 0; i < N; i++)
    {
       if (p->a[i] != b[i])
         abort();
    }
  return 0;
}

int main (void)
{ 
  check_vect ();

  return main1 (0, N);
}

/* { dg-final { scan-tree-dump-times "vectorized 1 loops" 0 "vect" } } */
/* { dg-final { scan-tree-dump-times "possible dependence between data-refs" 1
"vect" } } */
/* { dg-final { cleanup-tree-dump "vect" } } */

-------------------------- cut ---------------
if you change the 1 to 8, we should be able to vectorize that loop too.

Note I was wrong in PR 31995, that we got the same IR for that testcase as we
got for this bug, I had missed the cast in the IR.  Anyways this is
represenative of what the IR looks like for the testcase on the pointer plus
branch.


-- 
           Summary: can't determine dependence between p->a[x+i] and p-
                    >a[x+i+1] where x is invariant but defined in the
                    function
           Product: gcc
           Version: 4.3.0
            Status: UNCONFIRMED
          Keywords: missed-optimization
          Severity: enhancement
          Priority: P3
         Component: tree-optimization
        AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org
        ReportedBy: pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=32075


             reply	other threads:[~2007-05-24 21:56 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 8+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2007-05-24 21:56 pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org [this message]
2007-05-25  1:06 ` [Bug tree-optimization/32075] " pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org
2007-06-18 11:04 ` dorit at il dot ibm dot com
2007-06-20 16:57 ` spop at gcc dot gnu dot org
2007-06-20 23:42 ` spop at gcc dot gnu dot org
2007-06-20 23:45 ` spop at gcc dot gnu dot org
2007-06-21 21:05 ` ubizjak at gmail dot com
2007-06-24  4:07 ` pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot 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-32075-6528@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).