From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <gcc-bugs-return-468372-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org>
Received: (qmail 29702 invoked by alias); 24 Nov 2014 16:29:35 -0000
Mailing-List: contact gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Id: <gcc-bugs.gcc.gnu.org>
List-Archive: <http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-bugs/>
List-Post: <mailto:gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org>
Sender: gcc-bugs-owner@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 29209 invoked by uid 48); 24 Nov 2014 16:29:29 -0000
From: "rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug tree-optimization/64024] [5 Regression] gcc.dg/vect/vect-simd-clone-6.c ICEs
Date: Mon, 24 Nov 2014 16:29:00 -0000
X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC
X-Bugzilla-Type: changed
X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None
X-Bugzilla-Product: gcc
X-Bugzilla-Component: tree-optimization
X-Bugzilla-Version: 5.0
X-Bugzilla-Keywords:
X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal
X-Bugzilla-Who: rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
X-Bugzilla-Status: NEW
X-Bugzilla-Priority: P1
X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
X-Bugzilla-Target-Milestone: 5.0
X-Bugzilla-Flags:
X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields:
Message-ID: <bug-64024-4-0rEDv1f62x@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-64024-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
References: <bug-64024-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Bugzilla-URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/
Auto-Submitted: auto-generated
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-SW-Source: 2014-11/txt/msg02844.txt.bz2

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64024

--- Comment #7 from Richard Biener <rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
(In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #6)
> (In reply to Richard Biener from comment #5)
> > Generally calling SCEV analysis again during the transform phase asks for
> > trouble
> > (though it may work in most cases).  This means that the simple_iv calls
> > (which
> > are mostly useless as computed stuff isn't actually used in most cases)
> > should
> > be avoided at transform time.
> > 
> > Didn't look into this specific case but can do so (just assign the bug to me
> > then).
> 
> I can handle the storing of the op/linear_step combo somewhere, just don't
> know how to adjust it.  Shall vect_update_inits_of_drs update those, or can
> it e.g. stick the tree somewhere in the LOOP_VINFO (or its caller) and
> vect_simd_clone_call use it?

Not sure, but "linear_step" sounds like sth available already via
STMT_VINFO_LOOP_PHI_EVOLUTION_PART?  That is, you could store it there
(on the IV def stmt vinfo).  Possibly adding a new access macro that doesn't
have "PHI" in its name (and adjusting the comment before the stmt vinfo
field).