On 11/12/2015 10:08 AM, Bradley Lucier wrote:
On 11/12/2015 11:57 AM, Bernd Schmidt wrote:
The expanded warning allowed me to see how much memory really was needed
to apply gcse to some of my routines, and 128MB fixes my problem. The
limit has been 50MB for over 10 years, I think we can up it a
On 11/12/2015 12:08 PM, Bradley Lucier wrote:
On 11/12/2015 11:57 AM, Bernd Schmidt wrote:
The expanded warning allowed me to see how much memory really was needed
to apply gcse to some of my routines, and 128MB fixes my problem. The
limit has been 50MB for over 10 years, I think we can up it a
On 11/12/2015 11:57 AM, Bernd Schmidt wrote:
The expanded warning allowed me to see how much memory really was needed
to apply gcse to some of my routines, and 128MB fixes my problem. The
limit has been 50MB for over 10 years, I think we can up it a bit now.
{
+ unsigned int memory_request =
The expanded warning allowed me to see how much memory really was needed
to apply gcse to some of my routines, and 128MB fixes my problem. The
limit has been 50MB for over 10 years, I think we can up it a bit now.
{
+ unsigned int memory_request = n_basic_blocks_for_fn (cfun)
+* SBITMAP_SE
This patch (a) removes an exact copy of is_too_expensive from cprop.c,
(b) renames is_too_expensive in gcse.c to
gcse_or_cprop_is_too_expensive, (c) expands the warning in
gcse_or_cprop_is_too_expensive to say how much --param max-gcse-memory
needs to be increased, and (d) increases the default
