gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/vect/vect-multitypes-4.c

/* Disabling epilogues until we find a better way to deal with scans.  */
/* { dg-additional-options "--param vect-epilogues-nomask=0" } */
/* { dg-require-effective-target vect_int } */
/* { dg-add-options bind_pic_locally } */

#include <stdarg.h>
#include "tree-vect.h"

#define N 32

unsigned short sa[N];
unsigned short sc[N] = {0,1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10,11,12,13,14,15,
		16,17,18,19,20,21,22,23,24,25,26,27,28,29,30,31};
unsigned short sb[N] = {0,1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10,11,12,13,14,15,
		16,17,18,19,20,21,22,23,24,25,26,27,28,29,30,31};
unsigned int ia[N];
unsigned int ic[N] = {0,3,6,9,12,15,18,21,24,27,30,33,36,39,42,45,
	       0,1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10,11,12,13,14,15};
unsigned int ib[N] = {0,3,6,9,12,15,18,21,24,27,30,33,36,39,42,45,
	       0,1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10,11,12,13,14,15};

/* Current peeling-for-alignment scheme will consider the 'sa[i+7]'
   access for peeling, and therefore will examine the option of
   using a peeling factor = VF-7%VF. This will result in a peeling factor 1,
   which will also align the access to 'ia[i+3]', and the loop could be
   vectorized on all targets that support unaligned loads.
   Without cost model on targets that support misaligned stores, no peeling
   will be applied since we want to keep the four loads aligned.  */

__attribute__ ((noinline))
int main1 (int n)
{
  int i;

  /* Multiple types with different sizes, used in independent
     copmutations. Vectorizable.  */
  for (i = 0; i < n; i++)
    {
      sa[i+7] = sb[i] + sc[i];
      ia[i+3] = ib[i] + ic[i];
    }

  /* check results:  */
  for (i = 0; i < n; i++)
    {
      if (sa[i+7] != sb[i] + sc[i] || ia[i+3] != ib[i] + ic[i])
	abort ();
    }

  return 0;
}

/* Current peeling-for-alignment scheme will consider the 'ia[i+3]'
   access for peeling, and therefore will examine the option of
   using a peeling factor = VF-3%VF. This will result in a peeling factor
   1 if VF=4,2. This will not align the access to 'sa[i+3]', for which we 
   need to peel 5,1 iterations for VF=4,2 respectively, so the loop can not 
   be vectorized.  However, 'ia[i+3]' also gets aligned if we peel 5
   iterations, so the loop is vectorizable on all targets that support
   unaligned loads.
   Without cost model on targets that support misaligned stores, no peeling
   will be applied since we want to keep the four loads aligned.  */

__attribute__ ((noinline))
int main2 (int n)
{
  int i;

  /* Multiple types with different sizes, used in independent
     copmutations. Vectorizable.  */
  for (i = 0; i < n; i++)
    {
      ia[i+3] = ib[i] + ic[i];
      sa[i+3] = sb[i] + sc[i];
    }

  /* check results:  */
  for (i = 0; i < n; i++)
    {
      if (sa[i+3] != sb[i] + sc[i] || ia[i+3] != ib[i] + ic[i])
        abort ();
    }

  return 0;
}

int main (void)
{ 
  check_vect ();
  
  main1 (N-7);
  main2 (N-3);

  return 0;
}

/* { dg-final { scan-tree-dump-times "vectorized 1 loops" 2 "vect" { xfail { vect_no_align && { ! vect_hw_misalign } } } } } */
/* { dg-final { scan-tree-dump-times "Alignment of access forced using peeling" 0 "vect" { target { vect_element_align}  } } } */
/* { dg-final { scan-tree-dump-times "Alignment of access forced using peeling" 2 "vect" { xfail { vect_no_align || vect_element_align } } } } */
/* { dg-final { scan-tree-dump-times "Vectorizing an unaligned access" 8 "vect" { target { ! vect_element_align } xfail { ! vect_unaligned_possible } } } } */
/* { dg-final { scan-tree-dump-times "Vectorizing an unaligned access" 4 "vect" { target { vect_element_align } xfail { ! vect_unaligned_possible } } } } */