-optimization
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: vincenzo.innocente at cern dot ch
Target Milestone: ---
in the following code (compiled with -O2 or -O3 and even with -march=haswell)
gcc will use a branchless construct in foo but not in bar (changing from float
to int
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92335
--- Comment #3 from vincenzo Innocente ---
Understood for float
it seems to me that the transformation does not occur for integer neither
(signed or unsigned)
as in
using T= unsigned int;
T bar(T const * __restrict__ x,
T const * __restrict__
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56273
--- Comment #9 from vincenzo Innocente
2013-02-12 16:24:11 UTC ---
I am just rebuilding (Updated to revision 195983.) and noticed
/home/data/newsoft/gcc-build/./gcc/xgcc -B/home/data/newsoft/gcc-build/./gcc/
-B/afs/cern.ch/user/i/innocent/
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56381
Bug #: 56381
Summary: ICE: cc1plus: internal compiler error: in
gimplify_expr, at gimplify.c:7842
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.8.0
Status: UN
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56381
--- Comment #1 from vincenzo Innocente
2013-02-18 17:10:03 UTC ---
Created attachment 29484
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=29484
preprocessed file of user code (sorry for not reducing)
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55266
--- Comment #4 from vincenzo Innocente
2013-03-03 11:58:24 UTC ---
I see still problems when calling inline functions.
It seems that the code to satisfy the "calling ABI" is generated anyhow.
take the example below and compare the code g
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50728
--- Comment #5 from vincenzo Innocente
2013-03-03 12:01:23 UTC ---
crosspost with PR55266.
feel free to consolidate in a single PR
I see still problems when calling inline functions.
It seems that the code to satisfy the "calling ABI"
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56541
Bug #: 56541
Summary: vectorizaton fails in conditional assignment of a
constant
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.8.0
Status: UNCONFIRME
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50789
vincenzo Innocente changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||vincenzo.innocente at cern
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56829
Bug #: 56829
Summary: Feature request: "generic" builtin for "movemask"
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.9.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: enhance
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57110
Bug #: 57110
Summary: is the use of "uint_fast32_t" in intentional?
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.9.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57110
--- Comment #2 from vincenzo Innocente
2013-04-29 11:47:54 UTC ---
Understood.
The question should than be escalated to the c++ standard committee
In my opinion the use of a 32-bit unsigned int as storage and return type for a
mersenne_
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57132
Bug #: 57132
Summary: spurious warning: division by zero [-Wdiv-by-zero] in
if (m) res %=m;
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.9.0
Status: UNCONFIR
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57162
Bug #: 57162
Summary: Ofast does not make use of avx while O3 does
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.9.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57169
Bug #: 57169
Summary: fully unrolled matrix multiplication not vectorized
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.9.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: norma
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53895
--- Comment #5 from vincenzo Innocente
2012-08-15 06:58:49 UTC ---
btw I opened a gold bug
http://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=14342
which did not get any attention yet
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54268
Bug #: 54268
Summary: std::string::reserve not consistent with
std::vector::reserve
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.8.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54268
--- Comment #2 from vincenzo Innocente
2012-08-15 14:31:48 UTC ---
clang behaves similarly (even with -stdlib=libc++)
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54320
Bug #: 54320
Summary: [c++11] range access to VLA
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.8.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54320
--- Comment #3 from vincenzo Innocente
2012-08-19 07:24:52 UTC ---
int foo2(int N) {
int v[N];
for ( auto a : v)
if (a) return a;
return 0;
}
works, though was similar to std::begin(v) std::end(v)
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54320
vincenzo Innocente changed:
What|Removed |Added
Severity|normal |enhancement
--- Comment #5 from vinc
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54557
Bug #: 54557
Summary: [c++ lambda] error in assigning lambda expr though
"operator?:" while catching
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.8.0
Status:
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54557
vincenzo Innocente changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54966
Bug #: 54966
Summary: Does LTO requires a larger inline-unit-growth?
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.7.2
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54966
--- Comment #3 from vincenzo Innocente
2012-10-19 08:36:20 UTC ---
the patch fails w.r.t. 4.7
patch -p0 < ../../inline.patch
patching file ipa-inline.c
Hunk #1 FAILED at 473.
Hunk #2 FAILED at 491.
Hunk #3 FAILED at 545.
3 out of 3
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48636
--- Comment #26 from vincenzo Innocente
2012-10-19 08:45:03 UTC ---
I'm interested to test the patch on our large application currently compiled
with 4.7.2.
would it be possible to get the same patch against gcc-4_7-branch?
thanks
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54999
Bug #: 54999
Summary: [4.8 regression] ICE in tsubst_copy, at cp/pt.c:12387
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.8.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54844
vincenzo Innocente changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||vincenzo.innocente at cern
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54999
vincenzo Innocente changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55016
Bug #: 55016
Summary: request for specific builtins for rcp and rsqrt
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.8.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: enhanceme
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55016
--- Comment #2 from vincenzo Innocente
2012-10-23 05:19:37 UTC ---
For the application I have in mind a global flag will such as -ffaster-math
will not be suitable
as it would affect also places where full "single precision" is still requi
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55071
Bug #: 55071
Summary: "Horizontal sum" of bultin vectors
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.8.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: enhancement
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54400
vincenzo Innocente changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||vincenzo.innocente at cern
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55071
vincenzo Innocente changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50713
vincenzo Innocente changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|SLP vs loop: code generated |SLP vs loop: code generated
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50713
vincenzo Innocente changed:
What|Removed |Added
Component|tree-optimization |middle-end
Versi
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48636
--- Comment #32 from vincenzo Innocente
2012-10-28 11:27:22 UTC ---
In a small test (that I will eventually publish here) the new patch at -O2
looks superior to 4.7.2 at O3.
I would like to build a test with multiple source files where lto matte
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55149
Bug #: 55149
Summary: capturing VLA in lambda (error in 4.7.2 ICE in 4.8
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.8.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53746
vincenzo Innocente changed:
What|Removed |Added
Known to work||4.8.0
Known to fail|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55213
Bug #: 55213
Summary: vectorizer ignores __restrict__
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.8.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: enhancement
Pr
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55213
--- Comment #2 from vincenzo Innocente
2012-11-05 13:28:51 UTC ---
reading PR49279 it seems to me that gcc should NOT emit runtime alias checks,
Instead I see
15: create runtime check for data references *_12 and *_9
15: create runtime
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54966
--- Comment #8 from vincenzo Innocente
2012-11-09 06:39:33 UTC ---
Created attachment 28646
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=28646
test case (preprocessed with gcc 4.7.2)
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54966
--- Comment #9 from vincenzo Innocente
2012-11-09 06:52:22 UTC ---
better and worse!
better than 4.7.2
lto is worse in 4.8
Attached is a test case, just one file
bzip2 -d smatrix.ii.bz2
the main component is this
three different way of comput
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54966
--- Comment #10 from vincenzo Innocente
2012-11-09 11:33:37 UTC ---
I've repeated the tests again on a different machine and the result are the
same
gcc version 4.8.0 20121108 (experimental) [trunk revision 19] (GCC)
at O3 lto degrades the
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47860
Summary: is vectorization of "condition in nested loop"
supported
Product: gcc
Version: 4.6.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component:
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47860
--- Comment #1 from vincenzo Innocente
2011-02-23 16:32:36 UTC ---
it seems that there is a problem in the use of "unsigned int":
shall I open a different bug report?
even a simple comparison fails to vectorize
float amin(float * c, unsigned i
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47860
--- Comment #3 from vincenzo Innocente
2011-02-24 08:24:31 UTC ---
Thanks Ira for the quick answer.
For what concern
if (N <= 0)
that was the reason to use "unsigned int" which apparently cause vectorization
not to work.
As we are on the subjec
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47860
--- Comment #5 from vincenzo Innocente
2011-02-24 08:48:25 UTC ---
I see, if you ever will commit anything in the mainline please let me know (I
do like yet to work with patches in gcc :-).
I understand that you need to provide an "architectural
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47895
Summary: usage of __attribute__ ((__target__ ("xyz"))) with
buitins
Product: gcc
Version: 4.6.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Componen
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47895
--- Comment #2 from vincenzo Innocente
2011-02-26 09:55:03 UTC ---
I find that the solution with multiple files shifts the problem to the build
system, which is not necessarily an easier solution in all projects, and make
maintenance more difficu
ty: normal
Priority: P3
Component: tree-optimization
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: vincenzo.innocente at cern dot ch
I the following code the loop in "red" does not vectorize "because"of
note: reduction: not commutative/ass
Priority: P3
Component: tree-optimization
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: vincenzo.innocente at cern dot ch
At least in scimark2 sparse matrix multiplication the use of gather
instructions ends in code bloat and a substantial reduction of
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50789
--- Comment #13 from vincenzo Innocente ---
I just submitted a specific bug-report as PR57796
Priority: P3
Component: tree-optimization
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: vincenzo.innocente at cern dot ch
I am sure this has been already discussed, not found a specific report though.
below the code emitted for "add" is what expected, for
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57823
--- Comment #3 from vincenzo Innocente ---
indeed
float * bar3() {
const float * a = (float*) malloc(4*128);
const float * b = (float*) malloc(4*128);
float * c = (float*) malloc(4*128);
a = (const float*)__builtin_assume_aligned (a, 16
-optimization
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: vincenzo.innocente at cern dot ch
in the following example div uses ymm registries while sqr only xmm ones
gcc version 4.9.0 20130630 (experimental) [trunk revision 200570] (GCC)
cat avx2sqrt.cc
#include
double div
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57858
--- Comment #2 from vincenzo Innocente ---
actually the code for div and sqr is different already for standard SSE
c++ -std=c++11 -Ofast -S avx2sqrt.cc -ftree-vectorizer-verbose=1 -Wall ; cat
avx2sqrt.s
.L2:
movdqa%xmm0, %xmm1
addl
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57858
--- Comment #5 from vincenzo Innocente ---
I remember something similar in the past
--param max-completely-peel-times=1
sort of fix it… (why pre does not recognize that 1/(1+0) == 1 btw??
of course it is just a benchmark (and I can modify it t
: normal
Priority: P3
Component: target
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: vincenzo.innocente at cern dot ch
for instance
mkdir scimark2TMP
cd scimark2TMP
wget http://math.nist.gov/scimark2/scimark2_1c.zip .
unzip scimark2_1c.zip
c++ -S LU.c -O3
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57927
--- Comment #2 from vincenzo Innocente ---
COLLECT_GCC_OPTIONS='-S' '-O3' '-march=native' '-o' 'LU.native' '-v'
'-shared-libgcc'
/afs/cern.ch/user/i/innocent/w2/libexec/gcc/x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu/4.9.0/cc1plus
-quiet -v -D_GNU_SOURCE LU.c -marc
Component: target
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: vincenzo.innocente at cern dot ch
in this quite trivial benchmark
gcc does not generate avx/avx2 instruction using ymm registries
c++ -Ofast -S polyAVX.cpp -march=core-avx2 ; grep -c "ymm" polyAVX.s
0
clan
Priority: P3
Component: target
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: vincenzo.innocente at cern dot ch
in the following benchmark performances w/o vectorization are poor wrt to
expectations
I find out this is due to non zeroing a register before
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57952
--- Comment #1 from vincenzo Innocente ---
I modified a bit the benchmark adding timing
and the new version now vectorize YMM with avx2, still not with old avx
if I remove the call to rdtsc(); it does not use YMM anymore
-fno-tree-pre does not hel
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57954
--- Comment #5 from vincenzo Innocente ---
confirmed that the patch fixes the issue
c++ -O2 -march=corei7-avx polyAVX.cpp
time ./a.out
10358474048
2.965u 0.001s 0:02.97 99.6%0+0k 0+0io 146pf+0w
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57954
--- Comment #8 from vincenzo Innocente ---
thanks for getting in the trunk.
will be possible to back port to at least 4.8?
(this issue is there till 4.4!)
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: vincenzo.innocente at cern dot ch
in this trival example avx is used for corei7-avx and core-avx2
not for bdver1
float a[1024];
float x[1024];
float bar(float b) {
float r=0.;
for (int i=0; i!=1024; ++i)
r += a[i]+b*x[i
: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: vincenzo.innocente at cern dot ch
this is a regression w.r.t.
gcc version 4.9.0 20130820 (experimental) [trunk revision 201887] (GCC)
c++ -g -O2 -c -std=gnu++11 -fipa-pta ipa_err.i
RooMinimizer.cc: In destructor 'RooMinimizer::~RooMini
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58291
--- Comment #1 from vincenzo Innocente ---
Created attachment 30738
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=30738&action=edit
real-code file. just preprocessed no reduction attempted
P3
Component: libgomp
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: vincenzo.innocente at cern dot ch
CC: jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
took me years to learn and teach to use != instead of "<"….
float a[1024];
float b[1024];
void err() {
#pragma omp sim
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58462
--- Comment #2 from vincenzo Innocente ---
Thanks Jakub.
Downloaded the standard.
waiting for more examples of usage
It is a pity that it does not support c++ range loop
Let me highjack this bug to congratulate you and your collaborators for the
Priority: P3
Component: tree-optimization
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: vincenzo.innocente at cern dot ch
#include
float a[1024];
float b[1024];
float sumO1() {
auto s = 0.f;
#pragma omp simd reduction(+:s)
for (auto i=0U;i<1024;++i) {
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58472
--- Comment #2 from vincenzo Innocente ---
yes
cat omp4red.cc
float a[1024];
float b[1024];
float sumO1() {
float s = 0.f;
#pragma omp simd reduction(+:s)
for (int i=0;i<1024;++i) {
s += a[i]*b[i];
}
return s;
}
pb-d-128-141-131-26:ve
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58472
--- Comment #3 from vincenzo Innocente ---
on linux
c++ -O2 -ftree-vectorizer-verbose=1 -S omp4red.cc -fopenmp
omp4red.cc:8:13: note: loop vectorized
omp4red.cc: In function 'float sumO1()':
omp4red.cc:4:7: internal compiler error: in vectori
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58472
--- Comment #4 from vincenzo Innocente ---
gcc -O2 libgomp/testsuite/libgomp.c/simd-3.c -fopenmp
libgomp/testsuite/libgomp.c/simd-3.c: In function ‘foo’:
libgomp/testsuite/libgomp.c/simd-3.c:14:1: internal compiler error: in
vectorizable_store, a
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58472
--- Comment #6 from vincenzo Innocente ---
seems so
gcc -O2 libgomp/testsuite/libgomp.c/simd-4.c -fopenmp
c++ -O2 -S omp4red.cc -fopenmp| cat omp4red.s
.text
.align 4,0x90
.globl __Z5sumO1v
__Z5sumO1v:
LFB0:
etc
could you please
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58472
--- Comment #8 from vincenzo Innocente ---
Yes I compile gcc with -O2 -ftree-vectorize
on linux I also do bootstrap-lto
strange that the compiler does not warn about this uninitialized variable:
it does for a couple of others that force me to com
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58472
--- Comment #9 from vincenzo Innocente ---
w/o opening another bug report
c++ -O2 -S omp4red.cc -fopenmp -Wall
omp4red.cc: In function ‘float sumO1()’:
omp4red.cc:6:9: warning: ‘simduid.0’ is used uninitialized in this function
[-Wuninitialized
: libgomp
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: vincenzo.innocente at cern dot ch
CC: jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
I acknowledge that my understanding of "omp declare" is still limited.
Still the example below produces different result wi
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58482
--- Comment #2 from vincenzo Innocente ---
Thanks Jakub for the clear answer.
The reduction operator should be strictly commutative!
and I now understand the meaning of
omp declare reduction (I hope)
so I modified it as you can see below
results
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58482
--- Comment #4 from vincenzo Innocente ---
I see.
I have several use cases in which the reduction requires the access to two
variables
(minloc for instance: the minimum and its location)
btw tried
omp parallel for simd
got ICE
c++ -std=c++11 u
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48092
--- Comment #3 from vincenzo Innocente
2011-09-08 10:01:48 UTC ---
btw even in C with -Ofast
a*exp(x)*exp(y) (same for sqrt) is NOT optimized. compare
double exp0(double x, double y) {
return exp(x)*exp(y);
}
double exp1(double a, double x
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50374
Bug #: 50374
Summary: Support vectorization of min/max location pattern
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.7.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: enhancement
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50374
--- Comment #3 from vincenzo Innocente
2011-09-13 08:45:40 UTC ---
with
gcc version 4.7.0 20110910 (experimental) (GCC)
int lmin(float const * __restrict__ c, int N) {
int k=0;
for (int i=1; i!=N; ++i)
k = (c[k] > c[i]) ? i : k;
re
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40770
--- Comment #10 from vincenzo Innocente
2011-09-13 09:52:53 UTC ---
resurrecting this:
just checked with gcc version 4.7.0 20110910
-mveclibabi=svml
-LwhereverYouhaveIntelSoftware/linux/x86_64/Compiler/11.1/072/lib/intel64/
-lsvml -lirc
and si
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50374
--- Comment #9 from vincenzo Innocente
2011-09-20 12:05:01 UTC ---
does not compile to me
../.././gcc/tree-vect-loop.c: In function 'vect_is_simple_reduction_1':
../.././gcc/tree-vect-loop.c:2237:35: warning: suggest parentheses around '&&'
with
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50374
--- Comment #12 from vincenzo Innocente
2011-09-20 13:46:16 UTC ---
I'm getting these errors
../.././gcc/optabs.c: In function 'optab_d* optab_for_tree_code(tree_code,
const_tree, optab_subtype)':
../.././gcc/optabs.c:470:9: error: cannot conver
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50348
vincenzo Innocente changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||vincenzo.innocente at cern
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50483
Bug #: 50483
Summary: lto turns visibility from HIDDEN to DEFAULT
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: lto
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50348
--- Comment #5 from vincenzo Innocente
2011-09-22 11:49:29 UTC ---
indeed
and in "exception" header-file is a place where visibility is correctly handled
#pragma GCC visibility push(default)
extern "C++" {
namespace std
{
}
#pragma GCC visibilit
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50534
Bug #: 50534
Summary: sincos not supported for svlm
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.7.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: enhancement
Priority: P3
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50596
Bug #: 50596
Summary: Problems in vectorization of condition expression
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.7.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50596
--- Comment #1 from vincenzo Innocente
2011-10-03 08:40:53 UTC ---
manage to vectorize this
int j[1024];
void foo5() {
for (int i=0; i!=N; ++i)
j[i] = (a[i]
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50596
--- Comment #3 from vincenzo Innocente
2011-10-04 09:11:53 UTC ---
for (int i = 0; i < 1024; i++)
a[i] = b[i] < c[i] ? d[i] : e[i];
DOES vectorize with
-ftree-loop-if-convert-stores
even with
float * a; float * b; float * c; float * d; floa
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50622
Bug #: 50622
Summary: ICE: verify_gimple failed for std::complex
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.7.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priorit
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50649
Bug #: 50649
Summary: REGRESSION: ICE in vect_is_simple_use_1, at
tree-vect-stmts.c:5689 after rev 179607
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.7.0
S
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50596
--- Comment #13 from vincenzo Innocente
2011-10-07 07:35:40 UTC ---
is not PR50649 caused by your changes?
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50650
--- Comment #4 from vincenzo Innocente
2011-10-07 09:30:46 UTC ---
ok in my tests
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50596
--- Comment #14 from vincenzo Innocente
2011-10-07 10:15:03 UTC ---
signed char k[1024];
void foo6() {
for (int i=0; i!=N; ++i)
k[i] = (a[i]
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50661
--- Comment #14 from vincenzo Innocente
2011-10-08 13:48:22 UTC ---
Thanks for adding me in the loop.
I wonder if we can reuse
-funsafe-loop-optimizations
to force loop vectorization.
I know that INTEL has introduced a specific pragma to force v
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50622
vincenzo Innocente changed:
What|Removed |Added
Severity|normal |blocker
--- Comment #4 from vincenzo
1 - 100 of 504 matches
Mail list logo
