This is the mail archive of the
gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: Status of SEE and Autovectorization patches?
- From: Roger Sayle <roger at eyesopen dot com>
- To: Mircea Namolaru <NAMOLARU at il dot ibm dot com>
- Cc: Mark Mitchell <mark at codesourcery dot com>, Ayal Zaks <ZAKS at il dot ibm dot com>, gcc mailing list <gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org>, <gcc-patches at gcc dot gnu dot org>, "H. J. Lu" <hjl at lucon dot org>, <leehod at gmail dot com>, Leehod Baruch <leehod dot baruch at weizmann dot ac dot il>, Richard Henderson <rth at redhat dot com>
- Date: Fri, 5 May 2006 07:17:16 -0600 (MDT)
- Subject: Re: Status of SEE and Autovectorization patches?
Hi Mircea,
On Fri, 5 May 2006, Mircea Namolaru wrote:
> > That certainly does suggest a bug in the SEE patches. They needn't do
> > anything useful on IA32/AMD64, but they should presumably either (a) not
> > cause a bootstrap failure on these architectures, or (b) be disabled on
> > these architectures.
>
> Agree. I will check the bootstrapping on x86. (a) seems preferable but
> if not feasible in a short time frame, it will be (b).
Given that this is more than a bootstrap problem with non-default flags,
but testsuite regressions for gfortran and SPEC failures on a primary
platform, I think this falls under GCC's 48 hour rule. This simply
formalizes your phrase "short time frame" above, and means that it you're
unlikely to come up with a solution to these problems in the next day
or two, that you/we should simply disable -fsee from being turned on by
default at -O3.
I appreciate your efforts to actually correct the defficiencies in SEE,
which is indeed preferable, but for regression breakage in stage3, its
often better to simply band-aid the problem as quickly as possible, even
if you're close to a fix, as a courtesy to other developers.
Roger
--