On 03/18/2015 12:19 AM, Andrew Pinski wrote:
On Tue, Mar 17, 2015 at 11:27 AM, Jeff Law l...@redhat.com wrote:
On 03/17/2015 04:35 AM, Richard Biener wrote:
I'll test both. In the common case, the cost is going to be the basic
bookkeeping so that we can compute the transparent property. The
On 03/16/2015 01:27 PM, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
On Wed, Mar 11, 2015 at 03:30:36PM -0600, Jeff Law wrote:
+#ifndef GCC_GCSE__COMMONH
+#define GCC_GCSE__COMMONH
GCC_GCSE_COMMON_H instead?
@@ -1308,8 +1396,19 @@ gcse_after_reload_main (rtx f ATTRIBUTE_UNUSED)
if (expr_table-elements () 0)
On 03/16/2015 01:27 PM, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
On Wed, Mar 11, 2015 at 03:30:36PM -0600, Jeff Law wrote:
+#ifndef GCC_GCSE__COMMONH
+#define GCC_GCSE__COMMONH
GCC_GCSE_COMMON_H instead?
@@ -1308,8 +1396,19 @@ gcse_after_reload_main (rtx f ATTRIBUTE_UNUSED)
if (expr_table-elements () 0)
On 03/18/2015 12:19 AM, Andrew Pinski wrote:
On Tue, Mar 17, 2015 at 11:27 AM, Jeff Law l...@redhat.com wrote:
On 03/17/2015 04:35 AM, Richard Biener wrote:
I'll test both. In the common case, the cost is going to be the basic
bookkeeping so that we can compute the transparent property. The
On 03/16/2015 01:27 PM, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
What effect does the patch have on compile time on say x86_64 or ppc64?
I bootstrapped x86_64 trunk then timed compiling 640 .i/.ii files with
-O2. That was repeated 10 times (to get a sense of variability). Each
run took a little over 40 minutes
On Sat, Mar 21, 2015 at 01:47:10AM -0600, Jeff Law wrote:
On 03/16/2015 01:27 PM, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
What effect does the patch have on compile time on say x86_64 or ppc64?
I bootstrapped x86_64 trunk then timed compiling 640 .i/.ii files with -O2.
That was repeated 10 times (to get a
On Tue, Mar 17, 2015 at 11:27 AM, Jeff Law l...@redhat.com wrote:
On 03/17/2015 04:35 AM, Richard Biener wrote:
I'll test both. In the common case, the cost is going to be the basic
bookkeeping so that we can compute the transparent property. The
actual
computation of transparency and
On March 16, 2015 8:45:18 PM GMT+01:00, Jeff Law l...@redhat.com wrote:
On 03/16/15 13:27, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
On Wed, Mar 11, 2015 at 03:30:36PM -0600, Jeff Law wrote:
+#ifndef GCC_GCSE__COMMONH
+#define GCC_GCSE__COMMONH
GCC_GCSE_COMMON_H instead?
:-) Will fix.
@@ -1308,8 +1396,19 @@
On 03/17/2015 04:35 AM, Richard Biener wrote:
I'll test both. In the common case, the cost is going to be the basic
bookkeeping so that we can compute the transparent property. The
actual
computation of transparency and everything else is guarded on having
something in the hash tables -- and
On Wed, Mar 11, 2015 at 03:30:36PM -0600, Jeff Law wrote:
+#ifndef GCC_GCSE__COMMONH
+#define GCC_GCSE__COMMONH
GCC_GCSE_COMMON_H instead?
@@ -1308,8 +1396,19 @@ gcse_after_reload_main (rtx f ATTRIBUTE_UNUSED)
if (expr_table-elements () 0)
{
+ /* Knowing which MEMs are
On 03/16/15 13:27, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
On Wed, Mar 11, 2015 at 03:30:36PM -0600, Jeff Law wrote:
+#ifndef GCC_GCSE__COMMONH
+#define GCC_GCSE__COMMONH
GCC_GCSE_COMMON_H instead?
:-) Will fix.
@@ -1308,8 +1396,19 @@ gcse_after_reload_main (rtx f ATTRIBUTE_UNUSED)
if
64317 is a P2 regression related to making the PIC register a pseudo
register on the x86 port.
Basically post-LRA we still have some redundant loads of the PIC
register from memory (it's spilled to memory as other objects are more
profitable to keep in registers). But of the set of ~10
12 matches
Mail list logo
