On Feb 28, 2013, at 11:19 AM, Michael Ilseman <[email protected]> wrote:

> Nadav, I've been reading over the patches and I was wondering if you could 
> elaborate your concerns here. I share your goal of reducing compilation time 
> regressions for users that don't care about new feature X. From my very quick 
> glance over the patches, I didn't see anything I couldn't opt out of. Maybe 
> we can talk about specifics and figure out a way to make these changes not 
> affect other users/targets.
> 
> Let's say I care about a non-X86, non-TM target and compilation time. What's 
> the negative impact to me from these patches? Is there a cost I can't opt out 
> of?
> 
> Let's say I care about X86 non-TM compilation time, what additional costs am 
> I burdened with?

Hi Michael (Ilseman), 

As a non-x86 user you are going to have a slight negative impact on compile 
time and compiler code size. Its not a big deal. You need to pass additional 
parameters to all of the visitAtomicXXX && LegalizeXX methods. The 
initialization of Atomic operations will be slower because of the extra checks. 
Also, out of tree targets need to be updated. I don't think that this is a big 
deal, it is just another small increase in the compiler size and compile time. 

Thanks,
Nadav
_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits

Reply via email to