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/62173] [5.0 regression] 64bit Arch can't ivopt while 32bit Arch can
Date: Fri, 30 Jan 2015 12:32:00 -0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <bug-62173-4-WwrhwEbLqB@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <bug-62173-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=62173

--- Comment #32 from Richard Biener <rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
"So I take the other way around by passing the IV's ssa_name into
scev_probably_wraps_p along call sequence
"idx_find_step->convert_affine_scev->scev_probably_wraps".  Since the IV's
ssa_name is tagged with right range information, we can use it when proving
there is no overflow/wrap in src scev."

I'm not sure that this is always correct - is the name we ask
scev_probably_wraps
on always equal to the IV?  Is it never offsetted?  I think that we need a
soultion that involves tracking of range information all the way through
SCEV analysis and thus have it on the CHREC itself.


As for the other things - yes, there are multiple places where we lose sign
information and STEP is just one example (I _think_ I made DR_STEP for
data-ref analysis forced signed at some point).

Promoting the array index to a word_mode type sounds interesting, it of course
only makes sense for previously signed types - otherwise you just get another
conversion in the way.  Of course with GCC you will likely run into the issue
that this promotion is cancelled by the forced conversion to sizetype, so
you'll end up with unsigned word_mode again.  Btw - this was kind of my
suggestion with making get_inner_reference return *POFFSET as ssizetype type,
not sizetype (callers might not expect this, so for experimenting just
wrap get_inner_reference in sth converting that back to sizetype for all
callers but IVOPTs and tree-affine.c (and eventually tree-scalar-evolution.c)).


  parent reply	other threads:[~2015-01-30 12:32 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 40+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2014-08-18 16:12 [Bug target/62173] New: [AArch64] Performance regression due to r213488 spop at gcc dot gnu.org
2014-08-18 16:39 ` [Bug target/62173] " pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org
2014-08-18 19:13 ` spop at gcc dot gnu.org
2014-08-19  1:37 ` amker at gcc dot gnu.org
2014-10-28 11:28 ` [Bug target/62173] [5.0 regression] " jiwang at gcc dot gnu.org
2014-11-14  9:37 ` jiwang at gcc dot gnu.org
2014-11-17  2:14 ` amker.cheng at gmail dot com
2014-11-24 12:15 ` jiwang at gcc dot gnu.org
2014-11-24 12:38 ` jiwang at gcc dot gnu.org
2014-11-24 13:06 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
2014-11-24 23:01 ` jiwang at gcc dot gnu.org
2014-11-26 10:54 ` [Bug target/62173] [5.0 regression] [AArch64] Can't ivopt array base address while ARM can jiwang at gcc dot gnu.org
2014-11-27  9:35 ` jiwang at gcc dot gnu.org
2014-11-27 12:00 ` [Bug tree-optimization/62173] [5.0 regression] 64bit Arch can't ivopt while 32bit Arch can rguenther at suse dot de
2014-11-27 12:16 ` rguenther at suse dot de
2014-11-27 13:34 ` jiwang at gcc dot gnu.org
2015-01-23 17:33 ` jiwang at gcc dot gnu.org
2015-01-26 10:30 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
2015-01-26 11:10 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
2015-01-26 13:48 ` ramana at gcc dot gnu.org
2015-01-26 14:19 ` amker at gcc dot gnu.org
2015-01-26 14:51 ` rguenther at suse dot de
2015-01-26 14:53 ` rguenther at suse dot de
2015-01-26 15:03 ` amker at gcc dot gnu.org
2015-01-26 15:38 ` jiwang at gcc dot gnu.org
2015-01-27  3:21 ` amker at gcc dot gnu.org
2015-01-27  7:56 ` amker at gcc dot gnu.org
2015-01-27  9:11 ` rguenther at suse dot de
2015-01-28 18:26 ` LpSolit at netscape dot net
2015-01-29  6:48 ` amker at gcc dot gnu.org
2015-01-30  6:42 ` amker at gcc dot gnu.org
2015-01-30 12:32 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org [this message]
2015-02-05  7:27 ` amker at gcc dot gnu.org
2015-03-11 17:30 ` [Bug tree-optimization/62173] [5 Regression] " jiwang at gcc dot gnu.org
2015-03-11 17:46 ` jiwang at gcc dot gnu.org
2015-03-11 17:52 ` [Bug tree-optimization/62173] [5/6 " jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
2015-03-13  8:34 ` amker at gcc dot gnu.org
2015-06-02  3:34 ` amker at gcc dot gnu.org
2015-06-03  3:56 ` amker at gcc dot gnu.org
2015-07-22 11:44 ` jiwang 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-62173-4-WwrhwEbLqB@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).