aboutsummaryrefslogtreecommitdiff
path: root/gcc/tree-vect-data-refs.c
diff options
context:
space:
mode:
authorRobin Dapp <rdapp@linux.vnet.ibm.com>2017-07-18 09:23:35 +0000
committerAndreas Krebbel <krebbel@gcc.gnu.org>2017-07-18 09:23:35 +0000
commitec15a152077b766a2b61c36f86172af05aa03ab5 (patch)
treebe1907a923b236fb3c50be7ec8a8f85597b8f098 /gcc/tree-vect-data-refs.c
parent4169392a241995c854e72ab9ed74581bfe8c067a (diff)
downloadgcc-ec15a152077b766a2b61c36f86172af05aa03ab5.zip
gcc-ec15a152077b766a2b61c36f86172af05aa03ab5.tar.gz
gcc-ec15a152077b766a2b61c36f86172af05aa03ab5.tar.bz2
Fix PR81362: Vector peeling
npeel was erroneously overwritten by vect_peeling_hash_get_lowest_cost although the corresponding dataref is not used afterwards. It should be safe to get rid of the npeel parameter since we use the returned peeling_info's npeel anyway. Also removed the body_cost_vec parameter which is not used elsewhere. gcc/ChangeLog: 2017-07-18 Robin Dapp <rdapp@linux.vnet.ibm.com> * tree-vect-data-refs.c (vect_enhance_data_refs_alignment): Remove body_cost_vec from _vect_peel_extended_info. (vect_peeling_hash_get_lowest_cost): Do not set body_cost_vec. (vect_peeling_hash_choose_best_peeling): Remove body_cost_vec and npeel. From-SVN: r250300
Diffstat (limited to 'gcc/tree-vect-data-refs.c')
-rw-r--r--gcc/tree-vect-data-refs.c30
1 files changed, 8 insertions, 22 deletions
diff --git a/gcc/tree-vect-data-refs.c b/gcc/tree-vect-data-refs.c
index 907f35e..8b55d59 100644
--- a/gcc/tree-vect-data-refs.c
+++ b/gcc/tree-vect-data-refs.c
@@ -1078,7 +1078,6 @@ typedef struct _vect_peel_extended_info
struct _vect_peel_info peel_info;
unsigned int inside_cost;
unsigned int outside_cost;
- stmt_vector_for_cost body_cost_vec;
} *vect_peel_extended_info;
@@ -1226,6 +1225,8 @@ vect_peeling_hash_get_lowest_cost (_vect_peel_info **slot,
vect_get_peeling_costs_all_drs (elem->dr, &inside_cost, &outside_cost,
&body_cost_vec, elem->npeel, false);
+ body_cost_vec.release ();
+
outside_cost += vect_get_known_peeling_cost
(loop_vinfo, elem->npeel, &dummy,
&LOOP_VINFO_SCALAR_ITERATION_COST (loop_vinfo),
@@ -1244,14 +1245,10 @@ vect_peeling_hash_get_lowest_cost (_vect_peel_info **slot,
{
min->inside_cost = inside_cost;
min->outside_cost = outside_cost;
- min->body_cost_vec.release ();
- min->body_cost_vec = body_cost_vec;
min->peel_info.dr = elem->dr;
min->peel_info.npeel = elem->npeel;
min->peel_info.count = elem->count;
}
- else
- body_cost_vec.release ();
return 1;
}
@@ -1263,14 +1260,11 @@ vect_peeling_hash_get_lowest_cost (_vect_peel_info **slot,
static struct _vect_peel_extended_info
vect_peeling_hash_choose_best_peeling (hash_table<peel_info_hasher> *peeling_htab,
- loop_vec_info loop_vinfo,
- unsigned int *npeel,
- stmt_vector_for_cost *body_cost_vec)
+ loop_vec_info loop_vinfo)
{
struct _vect_peel_extended_info res;
res.peel_info.dr = NULL;
- res.body_cost_vec = stmt_vector_for_cost ();
if (!unlimited_cost_model (LOOP_VINFO_LOOP (loop_vinfo)))
{
@@ -1288,8 +1282,6 @@ vect_peeling_hash_choose_best_peeling (hash_table<peel_info_hasher> *peeling_hta
res.outside_cost = 0;
}
- *npeel = res.peel_info.npeel;
- *body_cost_vec = res.body_cost_vec;
return res;
}
@@ -1454,7 +1446,6 @@ vect_enhance_data_refs_alignment (loop_vec_info loop_vinfo)
unsigned possible_npeel_number = 1;
tree vectype;
unsigned int nelements, mis, same_align_drs_max = 0;
- stmt_vector_for_cost body_cost_vec = stmt_vector_for_cost ();
hash_table<peel_info_hasher> peeling_htab (1);
if (dump_enabled_p ())
@@ -1729,7 +1720,7 @@ vect_enhance_data_refs_alignment (loop_vec_info loop_vinfo)
unless aligned. So we try to choose the best possible peeling from
the hash table. */
peel_for_known_alignment = vect_peeling_hash_choose_best_peeling
- (&peeling_htab, loop_vinfo, &npeel, &body_cost_vec);
+ (&peeling_htab, loop_vinfo);
}
/* Compare costs of peeling for known and unknown alignment. */
@@ -1755,7 +1746,8 @@ vect_enhance_data_refs_alignment (loop_vec_info loop_vinfo)
{
/* Calculate the penalty for no peeling, i.e. leaving everything
unaligned.
- TODO: Adapt vect_get_peeling_costs_all_drs and use here. */
+ TODO: Adapt vect_get_peeling_costs_all_drs and use here.
+ TODO: Use nopeel_outside_cost or get rid of it? */
unsigned nopeel_inside_cost = 0;
unsigned nopeel_outside_cost = 0;
@@ -1837,10 +1829,7 @@ vect_enhance_data_refs_alignment (loop_vec_info loop_vinfo)
if (!stat)
do_peeling = false;
else
- {
- body_cost_vec.release ();
- return stat;
- }
+ return stat;
}
/* Cost model #1 - honor --param vect-max-peeling-for-alignment. */
@@ -1916,19 +1905,16 @@ vect_enhance_data_refs_alignment (loop_vec_info loop_vinfo)
dump_printf_loc (MSG_NOTE, vect_location,
"Peeling for alignment will be applied.\n");
}
+
/* The inside-loop cost will be accounted for in vectorizable_load
and vectorizable_store correctly with adjusted alignments.
Drop the body_cst_vec on the floor here. */
- body_cost_vec.release ();
-
stat = vect_verify_datarefs_alignment (loop_vinfo);
gcc_assert (stat);
return stat;
}
}
- body_cost_vec.release ();
-
/* (2) Versioning to force alignment. */
/* Try versioning if: