public inbox for gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Richard Biener <richard.guenther@gmail.com>
To: Richard Sandiford <richard.sandiford@arm.com>,
	GCC Patches <gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] vect: Tighten check for SLP memory groups [PR103517]
Date: Wed, 1 Dec 2021 14:14:32 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <CAFiYyc2XSFfFNcfb4g1zBQPzFwhhPvW_LUtozZBU+vhcZoZt5A@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <mpt35ncy55v.fsf@arm.com>

On Wed, Dec 1, 2021 at 11:56 AM Richard Sandiford via Gcc-patches
<gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org> wrote:
>
> When checking for compatible stmts, vect_build_slp_tree_1 did:
>
>                && !(STMT_VINFO_GROUPED_ACCESS (stmt_info)
>                     && (first_stmt_code == ARRAY_REF
>                         || first_stmt_code == BIT_FIELD_REF
>                         || first_stmt_code == INDIRECT_REF
>                         || first_stmt_code == COMPONENT_REF
>                         || first_stmt_code == MEM_REF)))
>
> That is, it allowed any rhs_code as long as the first_stmt_code
> looked valid.  This had the effect of allowing IFN_MASK_LOAD
> to be paired with an earlier non-call code (but didn't allow
> the reverse).
>
> This patch makes the check symmetrical.
>
> Still testing on x86_64-linux-gnu.  OK if testing passes, or doesn't
> this seem like the right approach?

It's indeed a too weak comparison of the classification of the first
and the followup operands, some larger refactoring is probably
needed to improve here (note how we compare STMT_VINFO_GROUPED_ACCESS
of the followup against the tree codes of the first stmt but also later
compare first_stmt_load_p against load_p).

The proposed patch looks reasonable (but then we could drop
the STMT_VINFO_GROUPED_ACCESS (stmt_info) part of the check?),
so OK.

Thanks,
Richard.

> Richard
>
>
> gcc/
>         PR tree-optimization/103517
>         * tree-vect-slp.c (vect_build_slp_tree_1): When allowing two
>         different component references, check the codes of both them,
>         rather than just the first.
>
> gcc/testsuite/
>         PR tree-optimization/103517
>         * gcc.dg/vect/pr103517.c: New test.
> ---
>  gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/vect/pr103517.c | 13 +++++++++++++
>  gcc/tree-vect-slp.c                  |  7 ++++++-
>  2 files changed, 19 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>  create mode 100644 gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/vect/pr103517.c
>
> diff --git a/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/vect/pr103517.c b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/vect/pr103517.c
> new file mode 100644
> index 00000000000..de87fc48f84
> --- /dev/null
> +++ b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/vect/pr103517.c
> @@ -0,0 +1,13 @@
> +/* { dg-do compile } */
> +/* { dg-additional-options "-march=skylake-avx512" { target x86_64-*-* i?86-*-* } } */
> +
> +int a;
> +short b, c;
> +extern short d[];
> +void e() {
> +  for (short f = 1; f < (short)a; f += 2)
> +    if (d[f + 1]) {
> +      b = d[f];
> +      c = d[f + 1];
> +    }
> +}
> diff --git a/gcc/tree-vect-slp.c b/gcc/tree-vect-slp.c
> index 7bff5118bd0..bc22ffeed82 100644
> --- a/gcc/tree-vect-slp.c
> +++ b/gcc/tree-vect-slp.c
> @@ -1121,7 +1121,12 @@ vect_build_slp_tree_1 (vec_info *vinfo, unsigned char *swap,
>                         || first_stmt_code == BIT_FIELD_REF
>                         || first_stmt_code == INDIRECT_REF
>                         || first_stmt_code == COMPONENT_REF
> -                       || first_stmt_code == MEM_REF)))
> +                       || first_stmt_code == MEM_REF)
> +                   && (rhs_code == ARRAY_REF
> +                       || rhs_code == BIT_FIELD_REF
> +                       || rhs_code == INDIRECT_REF
> +                       || rhs_code == COMPONENT_REF
> +                       || rhs_code == MEM_REF)))
>               || first_stmt_load_p != load_p
>               || first_stmt_phi_p != phi_p)
>             {
> --
> 2.25.1
>

  reply	other threads:[~2021-12-01 13:14 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 4+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2021-12-01 10:45 Richard Sandiford
2021-12-01 13:14 ` Richard Biener [this message]
2021-12-01 13:25   ` Richard Sandiford
2021-12-01 13:28     ` Richard Biener

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=CAFiYyc2XSFfFNcfb4g1zBQPzFwhhPvW_LUtozZBU+vhcZoZt5A@mail.gmail.com \
    --to=richard.guenther@gmail.com \
    --cc=gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org \
    --cc=richard.sandiford@arm.com \
    /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).