On Tue, 2020-04-28 at 09:30 +0200, Richard Biener via Gcc-patches wrote: > On Fri, Apr 10, 2020 at 11:28 AM Kewen.Lin <li...@linux.ibm.com> wrote: > > Hi, > > > > This is one fix following Richi's comments here: > > https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2020-March/542232.html > > > > I noticed the current half vector support for no peeling gaps > > handled some cases which never check the half size vector > > support. By further investigation, those cases are safe > > to play without peeling gaps due to ideal alignment. It > > means they don't require half vector handlings, we should > > avoid to use half vector for them. > > > > The fix is to add alignment check as a part of conditions for > > half vector support avoiding redundant half vector codes. > > > > Bootstrapped/regtested on powerpc64le-linux-gnu P8, while > > aarch64-linux-gnu testing is ongoing. > > > > Is it ok for trunk if all testings are fine? > > OK for stage1 (it's just a missed optimization). > > Thanks, > Richard. > > > BR, > > Kewen > > ---------------- > > > > gcc/ChangeLog > > > > 2020-MM-DD Kewen Lin <li...@gcc.gnu.org> > > > > * gcc/tree-vect-stmts.c (vectorizable_load): Check alignment to > > avoid > > redundant half vector handlings for no peeling gaps. Committed to the trunk.
jeff
