From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 6064 invoked by alias); 4 May 2015 20:56:19 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: Sender: gcc-bugs-owner@gcc.gnu.org Received: (qmail 5995 invoked by uid 48); 4 May 2015 20:56:15 -0000 From: "wschmidt at gcc dot gnu.org" To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org Subject: [Bug target/65456] powerpc64le autovectorized copy loop missed optimization Date: Mon, 04 May 2015 20:56:00 -0000 X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC X-Bugzilla-Type: changed X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None X-Bugzilla-Product: gcc X-Bugzilla-Component: target X-Bugzilla-Version: 5.0 X-Bugzilla-Keywords: X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal X-Bugzilla-Who: wschmidt at gcc dot gnu.org X-Bugzilla-Status: REOPENED X-Bugzilla-Resolution: X-Bugzilla-Priority: P3 X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: wschmidt at gcc dot gnu.org X-Bugzilla-Target-Milestone: 6.0 X-Bugzilla-Flags: X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields: Message-ID: In-Reply-To: References: 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: 2015-05/txt/msg00287.txt.bz2 https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65456 --- Comment #24 from Bill Schmidt --- No, I don't think so. The same change was made in GCC 4.9, and it didn't cause it to XPASS there (looking at gcc-testresults). Also, my change restricted the number of cases for which a test is expected to fail, rather than adding cases, so if it XPASSes now, it should have XPASSed prior to the change. Have you bisected to see which revision corresponds to the regression?