> On Tue, 17 Sep 2024, Richard Biener wrote: > > > The following restores the use of .SELECT_VL for testcases where it > > is safe to use even when using SLP. I've for now restricted it > > to single-lane SLP plus optimistically allow store-lane nodes > > and assume single-lane roots are not widened but at most to > > load-lane who should be fine. > > > > v2 fixes latent issues in vectorizable_load/store. > > > > Bootstrap and regtest running on x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu. > > So while this fixes the earlier observed 80 regressions from not using > SLP this now introduces many more from the CI (800), all in other > scan-assembler tests where after checking a sample of one (sic!) > we seem to use .SELECT_VL more now but expect not to. Unfortunately > none of the affected tests are runtime tests but at least for the > single test I investigated there is nothing wrong with using .SELECT_VL. > > I've checked the full CI results and as far I can see there are no > execute fails caused by this patch (I have locally done a full > check-gcc as well with a similar result). > > So I'm asking for explicit approval here. > > OK for trunk?
Odd. With my testing, rv64 only though, I haven't observed any additional fallout. But the CI knows better, usually. While I worked on my patch (which ended up looking similar to yours) I also noticed that some examples now use SELECT_VL where we didn't before, and, they appeared reasonable to me. Definitely saw no execution failures either. So, I'd say let's go ahead. Once it is in we can deal with the fallout. Same as the LOAD_LANES fallout that I wanted to take care of as soon as our internal matters permit. Thanks for fixing it. -- Regards Robin
