subject:"\[Bug target\/79709\] Subobtimal code with \-mavx and explicit vector"

[Bug target/79709] Subobtimal code with -mavx and explicit vector

2024-07-30 Thread pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79709 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Assignee|pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org |unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org

[Bug target/79709] Subobtimal code with -mavx and explicit vector

2021-08-19 Thread pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79709 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED Assignee|unassigned a

[Bug target/79709] Subobtimal code with -mavx and explicit vector

2017-10-07 Thread tkoenig at gcc dot gnu.org

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79709 --- Comment #9 from Thomas Koenig --- The generated code for the loop seems to be on par with what clang and icc do, so that part is fixed. Initialization is strange for icc. For clang, it really quite short: foo:

[Bug target/79709] Subobtimal code with -mavx and explicit vector

2017-09-29 Thread glisse at gcc dot gnu.org

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79709 --- Comment #8 from Marc Glisse --- Thomas, the code generated by gcc has changed (after some patches by Jakub IIRC). Do you consider the issue fixed or is the generated asm still problematic? .L13: vpextrq $1, %xmm2, %rax testq

[Bug target/79709] Subobtimal code with -mavx and explicit vector

2017-05-06 Thread glisse at gcc dot gnu.org

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79709 --- Comment #7 from Marc Glisse --- Created attachment 41331 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=41331&action=edit recognize a VEC_CONCAT from a constructor (not clean) One piece of the issue is v4di = { v2di, v2di } where we cu

[Bug target/79709] Subobtimal code with -mavx and explicit vector

2017-02-27 Thread jakub at gcc dot gnu.org

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79709 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment #6

[Bug target/79709] Subobtimal code with -mavx and explicit vector

2017-02-27 Thread rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79709 --- Comment #5 from Richard Biener --- Best split this bug into BIT_INSERT_EXPR foldings (yeah, those mentioned are missing) and the ira/reload issue.

[Bug target/79709] Subobtimal code with -mavx and explicit vector

2017-02-24 Thread glisse at gcc dot gnu.org

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79709 Marc Glisse changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Last reconfirmed|

[Bug target/79709] Subobtimal code with -mavx and explicit vector

2017-02-24 Thread glisse at gcc dot gnu.org

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79709 --- Comment #3 from Marc Glisse --- (In reply to Marc Glisse from comment #2) > We have trouble with your VSET macro (known issue): > two_28 = BIT_INSERT_EXPR ; > two_29 = BIT_INSERT_EXPR ; > two_30 = BIT_INSERT_EXPR ; > two_31 = BIT_INSE

[Bug target/79709] Subobtimal code with -mavx and explicit vector

2017-02-24 Thread glisse at gcc dot gnu.org

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79709 --- Comment #2 from Marc Glisse --- We have trouble with your VSET macro (known issue): two_28 = BIT_INSERT_EXPR ; two_29 = BIT_INSERT_EXPR ; two_30 = BIT_INSERT_EXPR ; two_31 = BIT_INSERT_EXPR ; it is easier for gcc if you write: v4do