This is the mail archive of the
gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
[PATCH] Fix dr_explicit_realign vectorization (PR tree-optimization/65369)
- From: Jakub Jelinek <jakub at redhat dot com>
- To: Richard Biener <rguenther at suse dot de>
- Cc: gcc-patches at gcc dot gnu dot org
- Date: Sat, 14 Mar 2015 10:04:53 +0100
- Subject: [PATCH] Fix dr_explicit_realign vectorization (PR tree-optimization/65369)
- Authentication-results: sourceware.org; auth=none
- Reply-to: Jakub Jelinek <jakub at redhat dot com>
Hi!
This issue is practically the same as PR63341, except in this case it is for
dr_explicit_realign rather than dr_explicit_realign_optimized, and the bump
isn't passed through multiple functions and thus is easier to fix.
Without the patch we use (dataptr & -16) for the first load and
((dataptr + 12) & -16) for the second load, which works just fine if the
elements are properly aligned (4 byte at least), but in this case we have
underaligned accesses (coming from folding of memcpy in this testcase, and
from 4 byte loads combined together recognized by bswap pass in the original
source), and so we really want to use ((dataptr + 15) & -16), otherwise
if we are unlucky we might read the same memory twice even when dataptr
is not 16 byte aligned.
Bootstrapped/regtested on
{x86_64,i686,aarch64,powerpc64{,le},s390{,x}}-linux, ok for trunk?
2015-03-14 Jakub Jelinek <jakub@redhat.com>
PR tree-optimization/65369
* tree-vect-stmts.c (vectorizable_load) <case dr_explicit_realign>:
Set bump to vs * TYPE_SIZE_UNIT (elem_type) - 1 instead of
(vs - 1) * TYPE_SIZE_UNIT (elem_type).
* gcc.c-torture/execute/pr65369.c: New test.
--- gcc/tree-vect-stmts.c.jj 2015-03-09 08:05:13.000000000 +0100
+++ gcc/tree-vect-stmts.c 2015-03-13 17:27:30.613529768 +0100
@@ -6468,9 +6468,8 @@ vectorizable_load (gimple stmt, gimple_s
case dr_explicit_realign:
{
tree ptr, bump;
- tree vs_minus_1;
- vs_minus_1 = size_int (TYPE_VECTOR_SUBPARTS (vectype) - 1);
+ tree vs = size_int (TYPE_VECTOR_SUBPARTS (vectype));
if (compute_in_loop)
msq = vect_setup_realignment (first_stmt, gsi,
@@ -6499,8 +6498,9 @@ vectorizable_load (gimple stmt, gimple_s
vect_finish_stmt_generation (stmt, new_stmt, gsi);
msq = new_temp;
- bump = size_binop (MULT_EXPR, vs_minus_1,
+ bump = size_binop (MULT_EXPR, vs,
TYPE_SIZE_UNIT (elem_type));
+ bump = size_binop (MINUS_EXPR, bump, size_one_node);
ptr = bump_vector_ptr (dataref_ptr, NULL, gsi, stmt, bump);
new_stmt = gimple_build_assign
(NULL_TREE, BIT_AND_EXPR, ptr,
--- gcc/testsuite/gcc.c-torture/execute/pr65369.c.jj 2015-03-13 17:37:10.926175685 +0100
+++ gcc/testsuite/gcc.c-torture/execute/pr65369.c 2015-03-13 17:35:40.000000000 +0100
@@ -0,0 +1,45 @@
+/* PR tree-optimization/65369 */
+
+static const char data[] =
+ "12345678901234567890123456789012345678901234567890"
+ "123456789012345678901234567890";
+
+__attribute__ ((noinline))
+static void foo (const unsigned int *buf)
+{
+ if (__builtin_memcmp (buf, data, 64))
+ __builtin_abort ();
+}
+
+__attribute__ ((noinline))
+static void bar (const unsigned char *block)
+{
+ unsigned int buf[16];
+ __builtin_memcpy (buf + 0, block + 0, 4);
+ __builtin_memcpy (buf + 1, block + 4, 4);
+ __builtin_memcpy (buf + 2, block + 8, 4);
+ __builtin_memcpy (buf + 3, block + 12, 4);
+ __builtin_memcpy (buf + 4, block + 16, 4);
+ __builtin_memcpy (buf + 5, block + 20, 4);
+ __builtin_memcpy (buf + 6, block + 24, 4);
+ __builtin_memcpy (buf + 7, block + 28, 4);
+ __builtin_memcpy (buf + 8, block + 32, 4);
+ __builtin_memcpy (buf + 9, block + 36, 4);
+ __builtin_memcpy (buf + 10, block + 40, 4);
+ __builtin_memcpy (buf + 11, block + 44, 4);
+ __builtin_memcpy (buf + 12, block + 48, 4);
+ __builtin_memcpy (buf + 13, block + 52, 4);
+ __builtin_memcpy (buf + 14, block + 56, 4);
+ __builtin_memcpy (buf + 15, block + 60, 4);
+ foo (buf);
+}
+
+int
+main ()
+{
+ unsigned char input[sizeof data + 16] __attribute__((aligned (16)));
+ __builtin_memset (input, 0, sizeof input);
+ __builtin_memcpy (input + 1, data, sizeof data);
+ bar (input + 1);
+ return 0;
+}
Jakub