From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: by sourceware.org (Postfix, from userid 48) id C8825395BC4F; Wed, 16 Nov 2022 17:16:28 +0000 (GMT) DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 sourceware.org C8825395BC4F DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gcc.gnu.org; s=default; t=1668618988; bh=NNakq/ZTaAWwE+lu+LfZFcZqN6aIRcxebALGlgSMRwU=; h=From:To:Subject:Date:In-Reply-To:References:From; b=fsg0Bd19sKZAeUEFpDkLLgFhLZBZ+URpvxFmCcHKsJb7UTK8ttmP3YSSayl79J+Jp Vnn4FyH3PiU1BVDTZ2sb9FtBV33d0rGTomLvAWJ3Gho+IIaHV1sto9roLh1xpaOFKh Pitpybjr6TDNe+mlMDISSMT0q9igUlgYQ5Y1CH4U= From: "hubicka at gcc dot gnu.org" To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org Subject: [Bug tree-optimization/99411] s311, s312, s31111, s31111, s3110, vsumr benchmark of TSVC is vectorized by clang better than by gcc Date: Wed, 16 Nov 2022 17:16:28 +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: 11.0 X-Bugzilla-Keywords: missed-optimization X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal X-Bugzilla-Who: hubicka at gcc dot gnu.org X-Bugzilla-Status: UNCONFIRMED X-Bugzilla-Resolution: X-Bugzilla-Priority: P3 X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org X-Bugzilla-Target-Milestone: --- X-Bugzilla-Flags: X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields: Message-ID: In-Reply-To: References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Bugzilla-URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/ Auto-Submitted: auto-generated MIME-Version: 1.0 List-Id: https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3D99411 --- Comment #7 from Jan Hubicka --- With znver4 current trunk and clang15 I still see this problem (clang code = is about 60% faster) for s311, s312 and s3111. Curious s31111 and s3110 no longer shows a regression.=