From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com (us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com [170.10.129.124]) by sourceware.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 6BCE63858D32 for ; Mon, 23 Jan 2023 10:29:49 +0000 (GMT) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.4.2 sourceware.org 6BCE63858D32 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=redhat.com Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=redhat.com DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=redhat.com; s=mimecast20190719; t=1674469789; h=from:from:reply-to:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date: message-id:message-id:to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version: content-type:content-type:in-reply-to:in-reply-to: references:references; bh=1LPJMpakcskfQSFrNHuKO5csnotF+uAsnfvahTGpK/Q=; b=H7w8PIv74oThXiD+lnWOQ1UgReBiUxon4g/Xe0apnxn9qxGBfkKo1M+JRm5Svxf3nTc9To +gZshVZgXXyjfNy32NvtLsFmHobdVhIkksbSCCxA6QZLWMcU3jOCr+O7TWymYnnbhWUzOu b+9j/ccgJ+Oe5vZ578pEUtm1QIvddjc= Received: from mimecast-mx02.redhat.com (mimecast-mx02.redhat.com [66.187.233.88]) by relay.mimecast.com with ESMTP with STARTTLS (version=TLSv1.2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id us-mta-437-OFKEDnC9N_KdzHzkPHij4A-1; Mon, 23 Jan 2023 05:29:40 -0500 X-MC-Unique: OFKEDnC9N_KdzHzkPHij4A-1 Received: from smtp.corp.redhat.com (int-mx10.intmail.prod.int.rdu2.redhat.com [10.11.54.10]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mimecast-mx02.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id CA509181E3F6; Mon, 23 Jan 2023 10:29:39 +0000 (UTC) Received: from tucnak.zalov.cz (unknown [10.39.192.223]) by smtp.corp.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 8354E492B02; Mon, 23 Jan 2023 10:29:39 +0000 (UTC) Received: from tucnak.zalov.cz (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by tucnak.zalov.cz (8.17.1/8.17.1) with ESMTPS id 30NATZg21538819 (version=TLSv1.3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT); Mon, 23 Jan 2023 11:29:36 +0100 Received: (from jakub@localhost) by tucnak.zalov.cz (8.17.1/8.17.1/Submit) id 30NATYO51538818; Mon, 23 Jan 2023 11:29:34 +0100 Date: Mon, 23 Jan 2023 11:29:34 +0100 From: Jakub Jelinek To: Richard Biener Cc: gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] tree-optimization/108482 - remove stray .LOOP_DIST_ALIAS calls Message-ID: Reply-To: Jakub Jelinek References: <20230123100943.6C675134F5@imap2.suse-dmz.suse.de> MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 3.1 on 10.11.54.10 X-Mimecast-Spam-Score: 0 X-Mimecast-Originator: redhat.com Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.5 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIMWL_WL_HIGH,DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,DKIM_VALID_EF,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE,RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H2,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_NONE,TXREP autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.6 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.6 (2021-04-09) on server2.sourceware.org List-Id: On Mon, Jan 23, 2023 at 10:28:01AM +0000, Richard Biener wrote: > On Mon, 23 Jan 2023, Jakub Jelinek wrote: > > > On Mon, Jan 23, 2023 at 11:09:43AM +0100, Richard Biener wrote: > > > The following deals with .LOOP_DIST_ALIAS surviving vectorization > > > because any of the loops involved were elided between loop distribution > > > and vectorization. As opposed to .LOOP_VECTORIZED which exists only > > > between if-conversion and vectorization with no intermediate passes > > > this is more difficult to deal with in advance and thus cleaning > > > up after vectorization looks better. There's the unconditional > > > vector lowering pass which looks like a good place for this (for > > > SIMD uid we have pass_simduid_cleanup). > > > > > > Bootstrapped on x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu, testing in progress. > > > > > > OK? > > > > I admit I didn't know something like LOOP_DIST_ALIAS even exist until > > today. > > Anyway, I wonder if there is still time to clean up during/after > > veclower21. > > That's what the patch does, but maybe I misunderstood the question. > > > I see fold_loop_internal_call propagates the return value to immediate > > uses and cfg_changed means we'll clean up the cfg, is that enough? > > It's enough to get rid of the internal function call which will ICE > if it reaches RTL expansion. The earliest point to get rid of them > is in the loop vectorizer but for the testcase at hand this requires > a walk of the whole IL where we cut the whole vectorizer pass with > the number-of-loops in function check currently. Ok then. Jakub