public inbox for gcc-bugs@sourceware.org help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org> To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org Subject: [Bug tree-optimization/44794] pre- and post-loops should not be unrolled. Date: Thu, 09 Mar 2023 08:06:50 +0000 [thread overview] Message-ID: <bug-44794-4-JYdG2CH4C8@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/> (raw) In-Reply-To: <bug-44794-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44794 Richard Biener <rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org Last reconfirmed| |2023-03-09 Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED Ever confirmed|0 |1 --- Comment #5 from Richard Biener <rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org> --- On trunk we end up with a vectorized loop with unrolled vectorized epilogue and scalar iteration and with a scalar loop copy used for n == 1 and the case when 'a' and 'b' alias, so this loop covers all possible 'n'. Prefetching then (rightfully) prefetches both of these which makes four out of them. What can be improved is the upper bound on the iteration for the epilog loop as created by tree_unroll_loop. That results in the RTL unroller seeing - upper bound: 2147483646 - likely upper bound: 2147483646 + upper bound: 14 + likely upper bound: 14 realistic bound: -1 ;; Unable to prove that the loop iterates constant times +;; Not unrolling loop, doesn't roll ... - upper bound: 536870910 - likely upper bound: 536870910 + upper bound: 2 + likely upper bound: 2 realistic bound: -1 ;; Unable to prove that the loop iterates constant times +;; Not unrolling loop, doesn't roll and thus only unrolling the main loops again. The prefetching unrolling should have been enough of course - I suppose the RTL unroller could detect prefetch instructions and refrain from unrolling loops with prefetches on the basis they are already tuned well (that could be also implemented in the unroll control target hook). I am testing a patch to improve the situation.
next parent reply other threads:[~2023-03-09 8:06 UTC|newest] Thread overview: 8+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top [not found] <bug-44794-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/> 2023-03-09 8:06 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org [this message] 2023-04-19 11:51 ` cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org 2023-04-19 11:53 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org 2023-04-19 11:55 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org 2010-07-02 23:54 [Bug tree-optimization/44794] New: " changpeng dot fang at amd dot com 2010-07-03 10:48 ` [Bug tree-optimization/44794] " rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-07-06 17:59 ` changpeng dot fang at amd dot com 2010-07-06 18:36 ` changpeng dot fang at amd dot com 2010-07-15 1:50 ` changpeng dot fang at amd dot com
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-44794-4-JYdG2CH4C8@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).