* [Bug tree-optimization/49542] [4.7 regression] 2 failures in the vectorization testsuite in 64-bit mode
2011-06-27 9:24 [Bug tree-optimization/49542] New: [4.7 regression] 2 failures in the vectorization testsuite in 64-bit mode ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu.org
@ 2011-06-27 9:49 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
2011-07-04 15:19 ` ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu.org
` (6 subsequent siblings)
7 siblings, 0 replies; 9+ messages in thread
From: rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2011-06-27 9:49 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49542
Richard Guenther <rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Target Milestone|--- |4.7.0
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 9+ messages in thread
* [Bug tree-optimization/49542] [4.7 regression] 2 failures in the vectorization testsuite in 64-bit mode
2011-06-27 9:24 [Bug tree-optimization/49542] New: [4.7 regression] 2 failures in the vectorization testsuite in 64-bit mode ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu.org
2011-06-27 9:49 ` [Bug tree-optimization/49542] " rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
@ 2011-07-04 15:19 ` ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu.org
2011-07-05 6:15 ` irar at il dot ibm.com
` (5 subsequent siblings)
7 siblings, 0 replies; 9+ messages in thread
From: ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2011-07-04 15:19 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49542
Eric Botcazou <ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
CC| |irar at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #1 from Eric Botcazou <ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu.org> 2011-07-04 15:18:57 UTC ---
Still present. Ira, should they be XFAILed in 64-bit mode as well?
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 9+ messages in thread
* [Bug tree-optimization/49542] [4.7 regression] 2 failures in the vectorization testsuite in 64-bit mode
2011-06-27 9:24 [Bug tree-optimization/49542] New: [4.7 regression] 2 failures in the vectorization testsuite in 64-bit mode ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu.org
2011-06-27 9:49 ` [Bug tree-optimization/49542] " rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
2011-07-04 15:19 ` ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu.org
@ 2011-07-05 6:15 ` irar at il dot ibm.com
2011-07-05 15:43 ` ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu.org
` (4 subsequent siblings)
7 siblings, 0 replies; 9+ messages in thread
From: irar at il dot ibm.com @ 2011-07-05 6:15 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49542
Ira Rosen <irar at il dot ibm.com> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
CC| |irar at il dot ibm.com
--- Comment #2 from Ira Rosen <irar at il dot ibm.com> 2011-07-05 06:15:23 UTC ---
I don't know. Why do they fail?
You wrote (here http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2009-11/msg00508.html)
> They pass on SPARC 64-bit because the operations are
> transformed to use the word mode.
It doesn't work anymore?
Thanks,
Ira
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 9+ messages in thread
* [Bug tree-optimization/49542] [4.7 regression] 2 failures in the vectorization testsuite in 64-bit mode
2011-06-27 9:24 [Bug tree-optimization/49542] New: [4.7 regression] 2 failures in the vectorization testsuite in 64-bit mode ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu.org
` (2 preceding siblings ...)
2011-07-05 6:15 ` irar at il dot ibm.com
@ 2011-07-05 15:43 ` ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu.org
2011-07-06 6:21 ` irar at il dot ibm.com
` (3 subsequent siblings)
7 siblings, 0 replies; 9+ messages in thread
From: ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2011-07-05 15:43 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49542
--- Comment #3 from Eric Botcazou <ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu.org> 2011-07-05 15:42:55 UTC ---
> You wrote (here http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2009-11/msg00508.html)
> > They pass on SPARC 64-bit because the operations are
> > transformed to use the word mode.
> It doesn't work anymore?
No, for pr33804.c the word mode trick isn't invoked anymore because in:
if (icode == CODE_FOR_nothing)
{
if (vect_print_dump_info (REPORT_DETAILS))
fprintf (vect_dump, "op not supported by target.");
/* Check only during analysis. */
if (GET_MODE_SIZE (vec_mode) != UNITS_PER_WORD
|| (vf < vect_min_worthwhile_factor (code)
&& !vec_stmt))
return false;
if (vect_print_dump_info (REPORT_DETAILS))
fprintf (vect_dump, "proceeding using word mode.");
}
(gdb) p debug_gimple_stmt(stmt)
D.2015_14 = D.2014_13 + D.2012_9;
(gdb) p vf
$9 = 2
(gdb) call vect_min_worthwhile_factor (code)
$10 = 4
(gdb) p vec_stmt
$11 = (gimple *) 0x0
vf is 8 on the 4.6 branch instead. Likewise for slp-multitypes-3.c.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 9+ messages in thread
* [Bug tree-optimization/49542] [4.7 regression] 2 failures in the vectorization testsuite in 64-bit mode
2011-06-27 9:24 [Bug tree-optimization/49542] New: [4.7 regression] 2 failures in the vectorization testsuite in 64-bit mode ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu.org
` (3 preceding siblings ...)
2011-07-05 15:43 ` ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu.org
@ 2011-07-06 6:21 ` irar at il dot ibm.com
2011-07-06 8:35 ` [Bug testsuite/49542] " ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu.org
` (2 subsequent siblings)
7 siblings, 0 replies; 9+ messages in thread
From: irar at il dot ibm.com @ 2011-07-06 6:21 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49542
--- Comment #4 from Ira Rosen <irar at il dot ibm.com> 2011-07-06 06:20:06 UTC ---
In that case they should fail. The vf in 4.7 is correct. In 4.6 it is updated
after stmts analysis, which may cause inconsistency. This patch
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2011-04/msg02210.html fixed this by moving vf
update before the analysis.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 9+ messages in thread
* [Bug testsuite/49542] [4.7 regression] 2 failures in the vectorization testsuite in 64-bit mode
2011-06-27 9:24 [Bug tree-optimization/49542] New: [4.7 regression] 2 failures in the vectorization testsuite in 64-bit mode ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu.org
` (4 preceding siblings ...)
2011-07-06 6:21 ` irar at il dot ibm.com
@ 2011-07-06 8:35 ` ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu.org
2011-07-06 8:47 ` ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu.org
2011-07-06 8:49 ` ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu.org
7 siblings, 0 replies; 9+ messages in thread
From: ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2011-07-06 8:35 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49542
Eric Botcazou <ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed| |2011.07.06 08:35:19
Component|tree-optimization |testsuite
Ever Confirmed|0 |1
--- Comment #5 from Eric Botcazou <ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu.org> 2011-07-06 08:35:19 UTC ---
Thanks for the diagnosis; I'm going to adjust the testcases.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 9+ messages in thread
* [Bug testsuite/49542] [4.7 regression] 2 failures in the vectorization testsuite in 64-bit mode
2011-06-27 9:24 [Bug tree-optimization/49542] New: [4.7 regression] 2 failures in the vectorization testsuite in 64-bit mode ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu.org
` (5 preceding siblings ...)
2011-07-06 8:35 ` [Bug testsuite/49542] " ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu.org
@ 2011-07-06 8:47 ` ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu.org
2011-07-06 8:49 ` ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu.org
7 siblings, 0 replies; 9+ messages in thread
From: ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2011-07-06 8:47 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49542
--- Comment #6 from Eric Botcazou <ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu.org> 2011-07-06 08:46:45 UTC ---
Author: ebotcazou
Date: Wed Jul 6 08:46:41 2011
New Revision: 175905
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=175905
Log:
PR testsuite/49542
* gcc.dg/vect/pr33804.c: XFAIL if vect_no_align unconditionally.
* gcc.dg/vect/slp-multitypes-3.c: XFAIL on SPARC unconditionally.
Modified:
trunk/gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog
trunk/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/vect/pr33804.c
trunk/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/vect/slp-multitypes-3.c
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 9+ messages in thread
* [Bug testsuite/49542] [4.7 regression] 2 failures in the vectorization testsuite in 64-bit mode
2011-06-27 9:24 [Bug tree-optimization/49542] New: [4.7 regression] 2 failures in the vectorization testsuite in 64-bit mode ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu.org
` (6 preceding siblings ...)
2011-07-06 8:47 ` ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu.org
@ 2011-07-06 8:49 ` ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu.org
7 siblings, 0 replies; 9+ messages in thread
From: ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2011-07-06 8:49 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49542
Eric Botcazou <ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution| |FIXED
--- Comment #7 from Eric Botcazou <ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu.org> 2011-07-06 08:48:59 UTC ---
The vectorizer testsuite is clean again on SPARC.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 9+ messages in thread