This is the mail archive of the gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org mailing list for the GCC project.


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
Other format: [Raw text]

Re: Revision 166517 caused PR 46414


2010/11/10 Jan Hubicka <hubicka@ucw.cz>:
>> On Wed, Nov 10, 2010 at 7:18 AM, Jan Hubicka <hubicka@ucw.cz> wrote:
>> >> The complette unrilling seems sane here.
>> >> This seems like good idea to me and i am not quite sure why 32bit compilation does not do the
>> >> transofrm. I will check now.
>> >
>> > The reason is word size. ?We compute move costs based on this, so vectorized moves are more expensive
>> > in 32bit cost model than 64bit.
>> > Perhaps there is way to hook vectorizer cost model in here?
>> >
>>
>> Shouldn't we use vector size to compute move cost for vector move?
>
> That would work for me. ?I am not terribly familiar with vector costs here, could you try to patch
> estimate_move_cost in tree-inline.c?
> We are very simplistic here assuming that pretty much all operations have cost of 1, so I guess
> making all vector moves to have cost 1 is fine. The main reason for that function is to catch large
> structure copies.
>

How about this patch?

-- 
H.J.
---
gcc/

2010-11-10  H.J. Lu  <hongjiu.lu@intel.com>

	PR tree-optimization/46414
	* tree-inline.c (estimate_move_cost): Check preferred vector
	mode for vector type.

gcc/testsuite/

2010-11-10  H.J. Lu  <hongjiu.lu@intel.com>

	PR tree-optimization/46414
	* gcc.target/i386/recip-vec-sqrtf-avx.c: Update for loop
	unrolling.

Attachment: gcc-pr46414-1.patch
Description: Text document


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]