public inbox for gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Richard Biener <richard.guenther@gmail.com>
To: "Kewen.Lin" <linkw@linux.ibm.com>
Cc: GCC Patches <gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org>,
	Richard Sandiford <richard.sandiford@arm.com>,
	 Segher Boessenkool <segher@kernel.crashing.org>,
	Peter Bergner <bergner@linux.ibm.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] vect: Don't retry if the previous analysis fails
Date: Wed, 17 May 2023 08:32:34 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <CAFiYyc2VqKcoepOpm_Vh=csjLzERNqg2-pdp6fEtBDBcSQqEBA@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <f026396c-59b8-36ae-2332-e2ece6db2e3b@linux.ibm.com>

On Wed, May 17, 2023 at 8:06 AM Kewen.Lin <linkw@linux.ibm.com> wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> When working on a cost tweaking patch, I found that a newly
> added test case has different dumpings with stage-1 and
> bootstrapped gcc.  By looking into it, the apparent reason
> is vect_analyze_loop_2 doesn't get slp_done_for_suggested_uf
> set expectedly, the following retrying will use the garbage
> slp_done_for_suggested_uf instead.  In fact, the setting of
> slp_done_for_suggested_uf only happens when the previous
> analysis succeeds, for the mentioned test case, its previous
> analysis does fail, it's unexpected to use the value of
> slp_done_for_suggested_uf any more.
>
> In function vect_analyze_loop_1, we only return success when
> res is true, which is the result of 1st analysis.  It means
> we never try to vectorize with unroll_vinfo if the previous
> analysis fails.  So this patch shouldn't break anything, and
> just stop some useless analysis early.
>
> Bootstrapped and regtested on x86_64-redhat-linux,
> aarch64-linux-gnu and powerpc64{,le}-linux-gnu.
>
> Is it ok for trunk?

OK for trunk and affected branches.

Richard.

> BR,
> Kewen
> -----
> gcc/ChangeLog:
>
>         * tree-vect-loop.cc (vect_analyze_loop_1): Don't retry analysis with
>         suggested unroll factor once the previous analysis fails.
> ---
>  gcc/tree-vect-loop.cc | 2 +-
>  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/gcc/tree-vect-loop.cc b/gcc/tree-vect-loop.cc
> index ed0166fedab..905145ae97b 100644
> --- a/gcc/tree-vect-loop.cc
> +++ b/gcc/tree-vect-loop.cc
> @@ -3044,7 +3044,7 @@ vect_analyze_loop_1 (class loop *loop, vec_info_shared *shared,
>                      res ? "succeeded" : " failed",
>                      GET_MODE_NAME (loop_vinfo->vector_mode));
>
> -  if (!main_loop_vinfo && suggested_unroll_factor > 1)
> +  if (res && !main_loop_vinfo && suggested_unroll_factor > 1)
>      {
>        if (dump_enabled_p ())
>         dump_printf_loc (MSG_NOTE, vect_location,
> --
> 2.31.1

  reply	other threads:[~2023-05-17  6:32 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 3+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2023-05-17  6:05 Kewen.Lin
2023-05-17  6:32 ` Richard Biener [this message]
2023-05-22  5:36   ` Kewen.Lin

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='CAFiYyc2VqKcoepOpm_Vh=csjLzERNqg2-pdp6fEtBDBcSQqEBA@mail.gmail.com' \
    --to=richard.guenther@gmail.com \
    --cc=bergner@linux.ibm.com \
    --cc=gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org \
    --cc=linkw@linux.ibm.com \
    --cc=richard.sandiford@arm.com \
    --cc=segher@kernel.crashing.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: link
Be 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).