public inbox for gcc-cvs@sourceware.org help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Kewen Lin <linkw@gcc.gnu.org> To: gcc-cvs@gcc.gnu.org Subject: [gcc r13-1083] vect: Move suggested_unroll_factor applying [PR105940] Date: Tue, 14 Jun 2022 05:58:23 +0000 (GMT) [thread overview] Message-ID: <20220614055823.BC9B13858C52@sourceware.org> (raw) https://gcc.gnu.org/g:f907cf4c07cf51863dadbe90894e2ae3382bada5 commit r13-1083-gf907cf4c07cf51863dadbe90894e2ae3382bada5 Author: Kewen Lin <linkw@linux.ibm.com> Date: Tue Jun 14 00:57:01 2022 -0500 vect: Move suggested_unroll_factor applying [PR105940] As PR105940 shown, when rs6000 port tries to assign m_suggested_unroll_factor by 4 or so, there will be ICE on: exact_div (LOOP_VINFO_VECT_FACTOR (loop_vinfo), loop_vinfo->suggested_unroll_factor); In function vect_analyze_loop_2, the current place of suggested_unroll_factor applying can't guarantee it's applied for all cases. As the case shows, vectorizer could retry with SLP forced off, the vf is reset by saved_vectorization_factor which isn't applied with suggested_unroll_factor before. It means it can end up with one vf which neglects suggested_unroll_factor. I think it's off design, we should move the applying of suggested_unroll_factor after start_over. PR tree-optimization/105940 gcc/ChangeLog: * tree-vect-loop.cc (vect_analyze_loop_2): Move the place of applying suggested_unroll_factor after start_over. Diff: --- gcc/tree-vect-loop.cc | 6 +++--- 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-) diff --git a/gcc/tree-vect-loop.cc b/gcc/tree-vect-loop.cc index 246347b9b08..e05f8e87f7d 100644 --- a/gcc/tree-vect-loop.cc +++ b/gcc/tree-vect-loop.cc @@ -2388,15 +2388,15 @@ vect_analyze_loop_2 (loop_vec_info loop_vinfo, bool &fatal, set of rgroups. */ gcc_assert (LOOP_VINFO_MASKS (loop_vinfo).is_empty ()); + /* This is the point where we can re-start analysis with SLP forced off. */ +start_over: + /* Apply the suggested unrolling factor, this was determined by the backend during finish_cost the first time we ran the analyzis for this vector mode. */ if (loop_vinfo->suggested_unroll_factor > 1) LOOP_VINFO_VECT_FACTOR (loop_vinfo) *= loop_vinfo->suggested_unroll_factor; - /* This is the point where we can re-start analysis with SLP forced off. */ -start_over: - /* Now the vectorization factor is final. */ poly_uint64 vectorization_factor = LOOP_VINFO_VECT_FACTOR (loop_vinfo); gcc_assert (known_ne (vectorization_factor, 0U));
reply other threads:[~2022-06-14 5:58 UTC|newest] Thread overview: [no followups] expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed
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=20220614055823.BC9B13858C52@sourceware.org \ --to=linkw@gcc.gnu.org \ --cc=gcc-cvs@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).