This is the mail archive of the
gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: [patch] Fix PR/18179 and use get_inner_reference in vectorizer: part 4
- From: Eric Botcazou <ebotcazou at libertysurf dot fr>
- To: Andreas Jaeger <aj at suse dot de>
- Cc: gcc-patches at gcc dot gnu dot org,Richard Henderson <rth at redhat dot com>,Ira Rosen <IRAR at il dot ibm dot com>,Dorit Naishlos <DORIT at il dot ibm dot com>
- Date: Sat, 1 Jan 2005 18:33:43 +0100
- Subject: Re: [patch] Fix PR/18179 and use get_inner_reference in vectorizer: part 4
- References: <20041223205912.GG19547@redhat.com> <20041228195345.GC7332@redhat.com> <m3is6kvxnd.fsf@gromit.moeb>
> I see the following new failures on Linux/x86-64 now:
>
> gcc.dg/tree-ssa/ifc-20040816-1.c (test for excess errors)
> gcc.dg/vect/pr18400.c (test for excess errors)
> gcc.dg/vect/pr18400.c scan-tree-dump-times vectorized 1 loops 1
> gcc.dg/vect/vect-1.c (test for excess errors)
> gcc.dg/vect/vect-1.c scan-tree-dump-times vectorized 3 loops 1
> gcc.dg/vect/vect-10.c (test for excess errors)
> gcc.dg/vect/vect-10.c scan-tree-dump-times vectorized 0 loops 1
> gcc.dg/vect/vect-11.c (test for excess errors)
> gcc.dg/vect/vect-12.c (test for excess errors)
> gcc.dg/vect/vect-13.c (test for excess errors)
> gcc.dg/vect/vect-14.c (test for excess errors)
> gcc.dg/vect/vect-15.c (test for excess errors)
> gcc.dg/vect/vect-16.c (test for excess errors)
> gcc.dg/vect/vect-17.c (test for excess errors)
> gcc.dg/vect/vect-18.c (test for excess errors)
> gcc.dg/vect/vect-19.c (test for excess errors)
> gcc.dg/vect/vect-2.c (test for excess errors)
> gcc.dg/vect/vect-2.c scan-tree-dump-times vectorized 1 loops 1
> gcc.dg/vect/vect-20.c (test for excess errors)
> gcc.dg/vect/vect-21.c (test for excess errors)
> gcc.dg/vect/vect-22.c (test for excess errors)
> gcc.dg/vect/vect-25.c (test for excess errors)
> [...]
Same failures on SPARC 64-bit.
On SPARC 32-bit, I see 1 new failure:
FAIL: gcc.dg/vect/vect-65.c scan-tree-dump-times vectorized 2 loops 1
loop at vect-65.c:37: not vectorized: unsupported unaligned load.
loop at vect-65.c:46: not vectorized: bad loop form. multiple exits.
loop at vect-65.c:57: not vectorized: unsupported unaligned load.
loop at vect-65.c:66: not vectorized: bad loop form. multiple exits.
So it looks like we now need unaligned loads to vectorize the loops in the
testcase. Is this expected?
--
Eric Botcazou