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 testsuite/63175] [4.9/5 regression] FAIL: gcc.dg/vect/costmodel/ppc/costmodel-bb-slp-9a.c scan-tree-dump-times slp2" basic block vectorized using SLP" 1 Date: Thu, 26 Feb 2015 10:19:00 -0000 [thread overview] Message-ID: <bug-63175-4-goXUh8Px1j@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/> (raw) In-Reply-To: <bug-63175-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63175 Richard Biener <rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|NEW |ASSIGNED Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment #8 from Richard Biener <rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org> --- Looking at the original description - note that copying cannot be optimized away, the accesses are to global variables (well, unless you build with -flto or -fwhole-program which will privatize the stmts). But of course the "correctness" test is optimized away very early. So the testcase should get a __asm__ volatile ("" : : "memory"); inbetween the copying and the correctness verification. Currently vectorization is entered with the IL <bb 2>: _8 = MEM[(unsigned int *)&in + 4B]; MEM[(unsigned int *)&out] = _8; _14 = MEM[(unsigned int *)&in + 8B]; MEM[(unsigned int *)&out + 4B] = _14; _20 = MEM[(unsigned int *)&in + 12B]; MEM[(unsigned int *)&out + 8B] = _20; _26 = MEM[(unsigned int *)&in + 16B]; MEM[(unsigned int *)&out + 12B] = _26; return 0; (see - no check anymore) We generate (with -mcpu=e6500 -m64 -maltivec -mabi=altivec, just to pick one example) <bb 2>: vect__2.12_11 = __builtin_altivec_mask_for_load (&MEM[(unsigned int *)&in + 4B]); vectp.14_13 = &MEM[(unsigned int *)&in + 4B] & -16B; vect__2.15_14 = MEM[(unsigned int *)vectp.14_13]; vectp.14_16 = &MEM[(void *)&in + 16B] & -16B; vect__2.16_17 = MEM[(unsigned int *)vectp.14_16]; vect__2.17_18 = REALIGN_LOAD <vect__2.15_14, vect__2.16_17, vect__2.12_11>; MEM[(unsigned int *)&out] = vect__2.17_18; return 0; and (insn 16 15 17 (set (subreg:DI (reg:V4SI 171 [ vect__2.15 ]) 8) (mem:DI (plus:DI (reg:DI 170) (const_int 8 [0x8])) [1 MEM[(unsigned int *)&MEM[(unsigned int *)&in + 4B] & -16B]+8 S8 A32])) t.c:14 -1 (nil)) (insn 17 16 18 (set (subreg:DI (reg:V4SI 171 [ vect__2.15 ]) 0) (mem:DI (reg:DI 170) [1 MEM[(unsigned int *)&MEM[(unsigned int *)&in + 4B] & -16B]+0 S8 A32])) t.c:14 -1 (nil)) (insn 21 20 22 (set (reg:V4SI 176) (mem:V4SI (reg:DI 174) [1 MEM[(unsigned int *)&MEM[(void *)&in + 16B] & -16B]+0 S16 A128])) t.c:14 -1 (nil)) so for some reason we expand the first aligned load using two DI loads. Investigating. I have a fix which ends up producing .L.main1: addis 9,2,.LANCHOR0@toc@ha li 3,0 addi 9,9,.LANCHOR0@toc@l addi 10,9,4 addi 9,9,16 neg 8,10 lvx 0,0,9 lvsr 13,0,8 addis 9,2,.LANCHOR1@toc@ha lvx 1,0,10 addi 9,9,.LANCHOR1@toc@l vperm 0,1,0,13 stvx 0,0,9 blr not sure if that is the same as with 4.8 though (don't have a cross ready to verify - but the RTL looks good).
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2015-02-26 9:39 UTC|newest] Thread overview: 39+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top [not found] <bug-63175-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/> 2014-09-05 8:47 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org 2014-10-30 10:42 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu.org 2014-11-24 13:16 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org 2015-02-21 20:07 ` msebor at gcc dot gnu.org 2015-02-22 20:38 ` macro@linux-mips.org 2015-02-24 6:56 ` msebor at gcc dot gnu.org 2015-02-25 20:45 ` msebor at gcc dot gnu.org 2015-02-26 10:19 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org [this message] 2015-02-26 10:56 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org 2015-02-27 9:18 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org 2015-02-27 9:49 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org 2015-02-27 11:23 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org 2015-02-27 11:24 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org 2015-02-28 9:26 ` msebor at gcc dot gnu.org 2015-03-02 14:14 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org 2015-03-02 14:24 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org 2015-03-02 16:24 ` msebor at gcc dot gnu.org 2015-03-02 16:48 ` rguenther at suse dot de 2015-03-02 16:50 ` rguenther at suse dot de 2015-03-02 16:58 ` msebor at gcc dot gnu.org 2015-03-02 17:47 ` rguenther at suse dot de 2015-03-02 18:13 ` msebor at gcc dot gnu.org 2015-03-02 18:23 ` rguenther at suse dot de 2015-03-03 5:10 ` msebor at gcc dot gnu.org 2015-03-03 9:21 ` rguenther at suse dot de 2015-03-03 9:42 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org 2015-03-03 15:05 ` dje at gcc dot gnu.org 2015-03-03 16:19 ` wschmidt at gcc dot gnu.org 2015-03-03 16:22 ` wschmidt at gcc dot gnu.org 2015-03-04 1:15 ` msebor at gcc dot gnu.org 2015-03-04 9:17 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org 2015-03-04 13:42 ` dje at gcc dot gnu.org 2015-03-04 13:55 ` rguenther at suse dot de 2015-03-06 18:44 ` msebor at gcc dot gnu.org 2015-03-07 16:19 ` [Bug testsuite/63175] [4.9 " law at redhat dot com 2015-03-10 21:07 ` msebor at gcc dot gnu.org 2015-03-11 10:09 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org 2015-03-23 18:58 ` msebor at gcc dot gnu.org 2015-05-29 16:49 ` wschmidt 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-63175-4-goXUh8Px1j@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).