for the test to go?
-
ChangeLog
2014-09-04 Easwaran Raman era...@google.com
PR rtl-optimization/62146
* ifcvt.c (dead_or_predicable): Make removal of REG_EQUAL note of
hoisted instruction unconditional.
2014-09-04 Easwaran Raman era...@google.com
PR rtl
On Fri, Aug 29, 2014 at 1:06 PM, Jeff Law l...@redhat.com wrote:
On 08/25/14 16:42, Easwaran Raman wrote:
This patch deletes REG_EQUAL note when a src register is replaced by a
constant in an assignment. This is to prevent spurious equivalences
between the constant and the expression
On Mon, Aug 25, 2014 at 3:42 PM, Easwaran Raman era...@google.com wrote:
This patch deletes REG_EQUAL note when a src register is replaced by a
constant in an assignment. This is to prevent spurious equivalences
between the constant and the expression in the REG_EQUAL note. In the
bug reported
?
This patch looks applicable to trunk as well, but I don't have a test
case to reproduce the issue in trunk.
ChangeLog:
2014-08-25 Easwaran Raman era...@google.com
PR rtl-optimization/62146
* cprop.c (try_replace_reg): Remove REG_EQUAL note when a constant
Ping.
On Mon, Nov 11, 2013 at 9:46 AM, Easwaran Raman era...@google.com wrote:
Ping.
On Thu, Nov 7, 2013 at 11:14 AM, Easwaran Raman era...@google.com wrote:
Before r193504, if a method can not be overridden, LOOKUP_NONVIRTUAL
is set and the call is direct. The changes at r193504 (to fix
Ping.
On Thu, Nov 7, 2013 at 11:14 AM, Easwaran Raman era...@google.com wrote:
Before r193504, if a method can not be overridden, LOOKUP_NONVIRTUAL
is set and the call is direct. The changes at r193504 (to fix PR
c++/11750) caused a regression to this behavior. This patch attempts
to fix
and is this ok for trunk?
Thanks,
Easwaran
2013-11-07 Easwaran Raman era...@google.com
PR c++/59031
* call.c (build_new_method_call_1): Comnpare function context
with BASELINK_BINFO type rather than instance type before
marking the call with LOOKUP_NONVIRTUAL.
testsuite/ChangeLog:
2013-11-07
On Wed, Oct 9, 2013 at 4:11 AM, Richard Biener
richard.guent...@gmail.com wrote:
On Tue, Oct 8, 2013 at 11:04 PM, Easwaran Raman era...@google.com wrote:
In cfgexpand.c, variables in non-overlapping lexical scopes are
assigned same stack locations at -O1 and above. At -O0, this is
attempted
the stack. We
are ok with a slight increase in compilation time to get smaller stack
frames even at -O0 and this patch would allow us do that easily.
Bootstraps on x86_64/linux. Is this ok for trunk?
Thanks,
Easwaran
2013-10-08 Easwaran Raman era...@google.com
* params.def
tests pass with the patch on x86_64/linux. Is this
ok for trunk?
2013-10-02 Easwaran Raman era...@google.com
PR c++/33911
* parser.c (cp_parser_init_declarator): Do not drop attributes
of template member functions.
2013-10-02 Easwaran Raman era...@google.com
This patch increases comdat-sharing-probability to 80 under -Os. This
reduces the amount of inlining and helps internal benchmarks.
Unfortunately, this causes slight regression on spec 2006. Ok for
google branches if all tests pass?
- Easwaran
comdat_sharing.patch
Description: Binary data
at 2:57 PM, Easwaran Raman era...@google.com wrote:
This patch increases comdat-sharing-probability to 80 under -Os. This
reduces the amount of inlining and helps internal benchmarks.
Unfortunately, this causes slight regression on spec 2006. Ok for
google branches if all tests pass?
- Easwaran
Ping.
On Mon, Sep 16, 2013 at 4:42 PM, Easwaran Raman era...@google.com wrote:
There are two separate root causes for the problem reported in PR
57393. This patch attempts to fix both.
First is due to newly created stmts that have the default UID of 0
which are compared with statements
reassociation to decouple them from the SSA variables involved
in reassociation.
This bootstraps in x86_64 and I am running the tests. Ok for trunk?
Thanks,
Easwaran
2013-09-16 Easwaran Raman era...@google.com
PR middle-end/57393
* tree-ssa-reassoc.c (get_stmt_uid_with_default
On Fri, Sep 6, 2013 at 12:05 AM, Richard Biener
richard.guent...@gmail.com wrote:
On Thu, Sep 5, 2013 at 9:23 PM, Easwaran Raman era...@google.com wrote:
On Tue, Aug 27, 2013 at 3:35 AM, Richard Biener
richard.guent...@gmail.com wrote:
On Thu, Aug 1, 2013 at 1:34 AM, Easwaran Raman era
On Tue, Aug 27, 2013 at 3:35 AM, Richard Biener
richard.guent...@gmail.com wrote:
On Thu, Aug 1, 2013 at 1:34 AM, Easwaran Raman era...@google.com wrote:
I have a new patch that supersedes this. The new patch also fixes PR
tree-optimization/57393 and PR tree-optimization/58011. Bootstraps
Submitted the patch (r202262) without the insert_stmt_after hunk. Also
fixed nits pointed out by Jakub.
- Easwaran
On Mon, Sep 2, 2013 at 2:31 AM, Richard Biener
richard.guent...@gmail.com wrote:
On Fri, Aug 30, 2013 at 6:13 PM, Easwaran Raman era...@google.com wrote:
On Fri, Aug 30, 2013 at 1
On Fri, Aug 30, 2013 at 1:25 AM, Richard Biener
richard.guent...@gmail.com wrote:
On Fri, Aug 30, 2013 at 2:30 AM, Easwaran Raman era...@google.com wrote:
Richard,
Do you want me to commit everything but the insert_stmt_after hunk
now?
Yes.
There are more similar failures reported
On Fri, Aug 30, 2013 at 9:26 AM, Jakub Jelinek ja...@redhat.com wrote:
On Fri, Aug 30, 2013 at 09:13:34AM -0700, Easwaran Raman wrote:
There are more similar failures reported in
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57393 and I have attached
the updated patch there. Shall I send
the check accordingly. I have attached the new patch.
- Easwaran
David
On Tue, Aug 20, 2013 at 12:26 PM, Easwaran Raman era...@google.com wrote:
The current hot caller heuristic simply promotes edges whose caller is
hot. This patch does the following:
* Turn it off for applications with large
+return true;
+}
+}
return false;
}
On Tue, Aug 20, 2013 at 12:26 PM, Easwaran Raman era...@google.com wrote:
The current hot caller heuristic simply promotes edges whose caller is
hot. This patch does the following:
* Turn it off for applications with large footprint since
it is used
(find_insert_point and appears_later_in_bb) instead of where the stmt
is created? I think that would be less brittle.
- Easwaran
On Tue, Aug 27, 2013 at 3:35 AM, Richard Biener
richard.guent...@gmail.com wrote:
On Thu, Aug 1, 2013 at 1:34 AM, Easwaran Raman era...@google.com wrote:
I
The current hot caller heuristic simply promotes edges whose caller is
hot. This patch does the following:
* Turn it off for applications with large footprint since the size
increase hurts them
* Be more selective by considering arguments to callee when the
heuristic is enabled.
This performs
Ping.
On Wed, Jul 31, 2013 at 4:34 PM, Easwaran Raman era...@google.com wrote:
I have a new patch that supersedes this. The new patch also fixes PR
tree-optimization/57393 and PR tree-optimization/58011. Bootstraps and
no test regression on x86_64/linux. Ok for trunk?
2013-07-31 Easwaran
I have a new patch that supersedes this. The new patch also fixes PR
tree-optimization/57393 and PR tree-optimization/58011. Bootstraps and
no test regression on x86_64/linux. Ok for trunk?
2013-07-31 Easwaran Raman era...@google.com
PR middle-end/57370
* tree-ssa-reassoc.c
Ping.
On Thu, Jun 27, 2013 at 10:15 AM, Easwaran Raman era...@google.com wrote:
A newly generated statement in build_and_add_sum function of
tree-ssa-reassoc.c has to be assigned the UID of its adjacent
statement. In one instance, it was assigned the wrong uid (of an
earlier phi statement
regressions on x86_64/linux.
Ok for trunk?
Thanks,
Easwaran
2013-06-27 Easwaran Raman era...@google.com
PR middle-end/57370
* tree-ssa-reassoc.c (build_and_add_sum): Do not use the UID of a phi
node for a non-phi gimple statement.
testsuite/ChangeLog:
2013-06-27 Easwaran
In lipo mode, this patch updates the overall unit size only when the
eventual function to which the callee is inlined is in primary module.
This is to avoid the situation where the module growth budget is used
up by inlines into auxiliary module functions that never get inlined
into some primary
On Tue, May 28, 2013 at 4:11 AM, Richard Biener
richard.guent...@gmail.com wrote:
On Mon, May 27, 2013 at 10:20 AM, Richard Biener
richard.guent...@gmail.com wrote:
On Sun, May 26, 2013 at 5:53 AM, Easwaran Raman era...@google.com wrote:
On Sat, May 25, 2013 at 4:46 AM, Richard Biener
outside the loop. Ok for trunk?
Thanks,
Easwaran
2013-05-28 Easwaran Raman era...@google.com
PR tree-optimization/57442
* tree-ssa-reassoc.c (appears_later_in_bb): Return correct value
when control exits the main loop.
2013-05-28 Easwaran Raman era...@google.com
On Sat, May 25, 2013 at 4:46 AM, Richard Biener
richard.guent...@gmail.com wrote:
Easwaran Raman era...@google.com wrote:
In that case, if my insert_stmt immediately follows dep_stmt and both
have the same UID, not_dominated_by would return true and I will end
up updating insert_stmt to dep_stmt
23, 2013 at 7:26 PM, Easwaran Raman era...@google.com wrote:
This addresses the case where UID alone is not sufficient to figure
out which statement appears earlier in a BB. Bootstraps and no test
regressions in x86_64 on linux. Ok for trunk?
Why not simply conservatively use gimple_uid
This addresses the case where UID alone is not sufficient to figure
out which statement appears earlier in a BB. Bootstraps and no test
regressions in x86_64 on linux. Ok for trunk?
Thanks,
Easwaran
2013-05-23 Easwaran Raman era...@google.com
PR tree-optimization/57337
* tree-ssa-reassoc.c
,
Easwaran
On Mon, May 20, 2013 at 4:43 AM, Steven Bosscher stevenb@gmail.com wrote:
On Mon, May 20, 2013 at 1:41 AM, Easwaran Raman era...@google.com wrote:
PR tree-optimization/57322
* (build_and_add_sum): If a BB is empty, set the UID of the statement
added to the BB
---
2013-05-19 Easwaran Raman era...@google.com
PR tree-optimization/57322
* (build_and_add_sum): If a BB is empty, set the UID of the statement
added to the BB to be 1.
Index: gcc/tree-ssa-reassoc.c
On Thu, Apr 25, 2013 at 4:42 AM, Richard Biener
richard.guent...@gmail.com wrote:
On Fri, Dec 7, 2012 at 9:01 PM, Easwaran Raman era...@google.com wrote:
It seems I need to reset the debug uses of a statement before moving
the statement itself. The attached patch starts from the leaf to root
This patch dumps the column number as part of dump_loc making the
output similar to inform(). This allows these messages to be pattern
matched by dg_message. Bootstraps with this change. Ok for trunk?
- Easwaran
-
2013-05-14 Easwaran Raman era...@google.com
* dumpfile.c (dump_loc
I want to resend this patch for consideration. I applied the patch to
trunk and confirmed that it bootstraps and doesn't cause test
regressions. Is this ok for trunk?
Thanks,
Easwaran
On Fri, Dec 7, 2012 at 12:01 PM, Easwaran Raman era...@google.com wrote:
It seems I need to reset the debug
. Ok if there are no test failures?
Thanks,
Easwaran
2012-12-07 Easwaran Raman era...@google.com
* tree-ssa-reassoc.c(find_insert_point): New function.
(insert_stmt_after): Likewise.
(get_def_stmt): Likewise.
(ensure_ops_are_available): Likewise.
(rewrite_expr_tree): Do not move statements
statements would be
very helpful.
Thanks,
Easwaran
On Sun, Nov 4, 2012 at 9:10 AM, Richard Biener
richard.guent...@gmail.com wrote:
On Wed, Oct 31, 2012 at 8:16 PM, Easwaran Raman era...@google.com wrote:
On Wed, Oct 31, 2012 at 4:36 AM, Richard Biener
richard.guent...@gmail.com wrote:
On Wed
I'd like to get a small patch to tree reassociation (
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2012-10/msg01761.html ) in.
Thanks,
Easwaran
On Mon, Oct 29, 2012 at 10:56 AM, Jakub Jelinek ja...@redhat.com wrote:
Status
==
I'd like to close the stage 1 phase of GCC 4.8 development
on Monday,
Ping.
- Easwaran
On Wed, Oct 31, 2012 at 12:16 PM, Easwaran Raman era...@google.com wrote:
On Wed, Oct 31, 2012 at 4:36 AM, Richard Biener
richard.guent...@gmail.com wrote:
On Wed, Oct 24, 2012 at 4:02 AM, Easwaran Raman era...@google.com wrote:
On Tue, Oct 23, 2012 at 2:52 AM, Richard
On Fri, Oct 26, 2012 at 8:05 AM, Jan Hubicka hubi...@ucw.cz wrote:
Hi,
On Tue, Oct 23, 2012 at 3:03 AM, Jan Hubicka hubi...@ucw.cz wrote:
Ping.
On Wed, Oct 17, 2012 at 1:48 PM, Easwaran Raman era...@google.com wrote:
Hi,
This patch fixes bugs introduced by my previous patch
On Wed, Oct 31, 2012 at 4:36 AM, Richard Biener
richard.guent...@gmail.com wrote:
On Wed, Oct 24, 2012 at 4:02 AM, Easwaran Raman era...@google.com wrote:
On Tue, Oct 23, 2012 at 2:52 AM, Richard Biener
richard.guent...@gmail.com wrote:
On Mon, Oct 22, 2012 at 8:31 PM, Easwaran Raman era
Hi,
On Tue, Oct 23, 2012 at 3:03 AM, Jan Hubicka hubi...@ucw.cz wrote:
Ping.
On Wed, Oct 17, 2012 at 1:48 PM, Easwaran Raman era...@google.com wrote:
Hi,
This patch fixes bugs introduced by my previous patch to propagate
profiles during switch expansion. Bootstrap and profiledbootstrap
On Tue, Oct 23, 2012 at 3:03 AM, Jan Hubicka hubi...@ucw.cz wrote:
Ping.
On Wed, Oct 17, 2012 at 1:48 PM, Easwaran Raman era...@google.com wrote:
Hi,
This patch fixes bugs introduced by my previous patch to propagate
profiles during switch expansion. Bootstrap and profiledbootstrap
On Tue, Oct 23, 2012 at 2:52 AM, Richard Biener
richard.guent...@gmail.com wrote:
On Mon, Oct 22, 2012 at 8:31 PM, Easwaran Raman era...@google.com wrote:
On Mon, Oct 22, 2012 at 12:59 AM, Richard Biener
richard.guent...@gmail.com wrote:
On Fri, Oct 19, 2012 at 12:36 AM, Easwaran Raman era
On Mon, Oct 22, 2012 at 12:59 AM, Richard Biener
richard.guent...@gmail.com wrote:
On Fri, Oct 19, 2012 at 12:36 AM, Easwaran Raman era...@google.com wrote:
Hi,
During expression reassociation, statements are conservatively moved
downwards to ensure that dependences are correctly satisfied
Ping.
On Wed, Oct 17, 2012 at 1:48 PM, Easwaran Raman era...@google.com wrote:
Hi,
This patch fixes bugs introduced by my previous patch to propagate
profiles during switch expansion. Bootstrap and profiledbootstrap
successful on x86_64. Confirmed that it fixes the crashes reported in
PR
On Fri, Oct 19, 2012 at 5:13 PM, Xinliang David Li davi...@google.com wrote:
On Thu, Oct 18, 2012 at 3:36 PM, Easwaran Raman era...@google.com wrote:
Hi,
During expression reassociation, statements are conservatively moved
downwards to ensure that dependences are correctly satisfied after
on x86_64/linux. OK for trunk?
Thanks,
Easwaran
2012-10-18 Easwaran Raman era...@google.com
* tree-ssa-reassoc.c(assign_uids): New function.
(assign_uids_in_relevant_bbs): Likewise.
(ensure_ops_are_available): Likewise.
(rewrite_expr_tree): Do not move statements beyond what is
necessary. Remove
Hi,
This patch fixes bugs introduced by my previous patch to propagate
profiles during switch expansion. Bootstrap and profiledbootstrap
successful on x86_64. Confirmed that it fixes the crashes reported in
PR middle-end/54957. OK for trunk?
- Easwaran
2012-10-17 Easwaran Raman era
On Sun, Oct 14, 2012 at 8:09 AM, Jan Hubicka hubi...@ucw.cz wrote:
Hi,
Index: optabs.c
===
--- optabs.c(revision 191879)
+++ optabs.c(working copy)
@@ -4249,7 +4249,7 @@ prepare_operand (enum insn_code icode, rtx x, int
Ping.
On Mon, Oct 8, 2012 at 5:46 PM, Easwaran Raman era...@google.com wrote:
I have attached a revised patch. The updated ChangeLog is given below
and I have responded to your comments inline:
2012-10-08 Easwaran Raman era...@google.com
* optabs.c (emit_cmp_and_jump_insn_1): Add a new
On Fri, Oct 12, 2012 at 1:45 AM, Richard Biener
richard.guent...@gmail.com wrote:
On Fri, Oct 12, 2012 at 3:09 AM, Easwaran Raman era...@google.com wrote:
Thanks for the comments. As David wrote, the intent of the patch is
not to do a general purpose scheduling, but to compensate
regressions on a x86_64 machine running linux. Ok for
google/4_7 and google/main branches?
Google ref b/6982747
2012-10-11 Easwaran Raman era...@google.com
* libsupc++/Makefile.am: Add del_opsz.cc to sources.
* libsupc++/Makefile.in: Regenerated.
* libsupc++/del_opsz.cc: New file
, 2012 at 3:52 AM, Easwaran Raman era...@google.com wrote:
+/* Move STMT up within its BB until it can not be moved any further. */
+
+static void move_stmt_upwards (gimple stmt)
+{
+ gimple_stmt_iterator gsi, gsistmt;
+ tree rhs1, rhs2;
+ gimple rhs1def = NULL, rhs2def = NULL;
+ rhs1
in reassociation and pushes them upwards in the BB
as far as possible without violating dependences. Bootstraps and no
tests regressions on a x86_64 machine running linux. Ok for trunk?
- Easwaran
---
2012-10-10 Easwaran Raman era...@google.com
* tree-ssa-reassoc.c (move_stmt_upwards
Hi Honza,
I am addressing some of the questions you raise here. Will send an
updated patch later.
On Thu, Oct 4, 2012 at 6:19 AM, Jan Hubicka hubi...@ucw.cz wrote:
@@ -560,7 +577,6 @@ compute_outgoing_frequencies (basic_block b)
return;
}
}
-
if (single_succ_p (b))
corresponding to the cases are (nearly the) same as
at the gimple level.
Bootstrapped and profile-bootstrapped on an x86_64/linux machine. OK for trunk?
- Easwaran
--
2012-10-02 Easwaran Raman era...@google.com
* cfgbuild.c (gen_probabilities_from_existing_counts): New function
pow, which can then
be shrink-wrapped by cdce. So it seems reasonable to do this
reordering. Bootstraps on x86_64 on linux with no test regression. OK
for trunk?
- Easwaran
--
2012-06-14 Easwaran Raman era...@google.com
* gcc/passes.c (init_optimization_passes
ChangeLog entry has a gcc/ prefix that shouldn't be there. Here is the
revised entry:
2012-06-14 Easwaran Raman era...@google.com
* passes.c (init_optimization_passes): Remove pass_call_cdce
from its current position and insert after pass_dce.
On Thu, Jun 14, 2012 at 6:38
Ping.
On Mon, Apr 9, 2012 at 2:33 PM, Easwaran Raman era...@google.com wrote:
On Sun, Mar 25, 2012 at 9:40 PM, Easwaran Raman era...@google.com wrote:
On Sun, Mar 25, 2012 at 12:22 PM, Jan Hubicka hubi...@ucw.cz wrote:
This patch propagates execution count of thee case labels of a
switch-case
On Sun, Mar 25, 2012 at 9:40 PM, Easwaran Raman era...@google.com wrote:
On Sun, Mar 25, 2012 at 12:22 PM, Jan Hubicka hubi...@ucw.cz wrote:
This patch propagates execution count of thee case labels of a
switch-case statement after its expansion. Bootstraps and all
tests pass. OK for trunk
I want to revive this patch for mainline and have some questions on
Honza's comments.
On Fri, Apr 29, 2011 at 1:48 PM, Jan Hubicka hubi...@ucw.cz wrote:
A known limitation is that value profiling is not yet sampled, but it
does not seem to cause problems.
For the performance alone, we
On Sun, Mar 25, 2012 at 12:22 PM, Jan Hubicka hubi...@ucw.cz wrote:
This patch propagates execution count of thee case labels of a
switch-case statement after its expansion. Bootstraps and all
tests pass. OK for trunk?
Hi,
while this is resonable thing to do, I belive it would make most
This patch propagates execution count of thee case labels of a
switch-case statement after its expansion. Bootstraps and all
tests pass. OK for trunk?
2012-03-23 Easwaran Raman era...@google.com
* cfgbuild.c (non_zero_profile_counts): New function
equally which can cause poor optimization of
hot code. This patch ensures that the counts collected during profile
collection are correctly propagated allowing hot code to be better
optimized by RTL optimizations. Patch tested on x86_64.
- Easwaran
On Fri, Mar 23, 2012 at 10:43 AM, Easwaran Raman era
On Fri, Mar 23, 2012 at 3:29 PM, Andi Kleen a...@firstfloor.org wrote:
Easwaran Raman era...@google.com writes:
Some more background on this patch: Right now, while the execution
counts of different case labels of a switch statement are obtained
during profile collection
that compiling a C++ program that uses std::vector with -fsized-delete invokes
the two parameter version of operator delete.
OK for google/main and google/4_6 branches?
c-family/ChangeLog.google-main:
2012-03-12 Easwaran Raman era...@google.com
* c-cppbuiltin.c (c_cpp_builtins): Define
On Tue, Jan 31, 2012 at 10:16 PM, Xinliang David Li davi...@google.com wrote:
Ok for google branch with minor changes below.
thanks,
David
+#define case_probability(x, y) ((y) ? ((x) * REG_BR_PROB_BASE / (y)) :
-1)
+
Using upper case for macro?
From
This patch propagates profile information to RTL level when expanding
switch statements using jump table or a binary tree of branches.
Ok for google/gcc-4_6 branch? I would like the patch to be considered
for trunk when stage 1 opens again.
-Easwaran
2012-01-31 Easwaran Raman era
and no test regression. OK for google/main and
google/gcc-4_6 branches?
-
011-12-17 Easwaran Raman era...@google.com
* common.opt (fsized-delete): New option.
cp/ChangeLog.google-main:
2011-12-17 Easwaran Raman era...@google.com
* decl.c (cxx_init_decl_processing
On Mon, Dec 12, 2011 at 1:52 PM, Easwaran Raman era...@google.com wrote:
On Mon, Dec 12, 2011 at 12:41 PM, Paolo Carlini
paolo.carl...@oracle.com wrote:
On 12/12/2011 09:37 PM, Easwaran Raman wrote:
Thanks for the comments Paolo. I have attached the new patch. I have
bumped the version
Thanks for the comments Paolo. I have attached the new patch. I have
bumped the version to 3.4.18 and used _ZdlPv[jmy] in gnu.ver. I have
also added the symbol to baseline_symbols.txt of other targets.
-Easwaran
2011-12-11 Easwaran Raman era...@google.com
* common.opt
On Mon, Dec 12, 2011 at 12:41 PM, Paolo Carlini
paolo.carl...@oracle.com wrote:
On 12/12/2011 09:37 PM, Easwaran Raman wrote:
Thanks for the comments Paolo. I have attached the new patch. I have
bumped the version to 3.4.18
You shouldn't: 4.7 is not out yet, thus no reason to increase
?
---
2011-12-11 Easwaran Raman era...@google.com
* common.opt (fsized-delete): New option.
cp/ChangeLog.google-4_6:
2011-12-11 Easwaran Raman era...@google.com
* decl.c (cxx_init_decl_processing): Specify a function that
takes a void* and size_t
branches?
-Easwaran
2011-09-30 Easwaran Raman era...@google.com
* tree-profile.c (gcov_sample_counter_decl): Add GTY marker.
(gcov_sampling_rate_decl): Likewise.
(add_sampling_to_edge_counters): Do not free
instrumentation_to_be_sampled
+static inline hashval_t
+edge_hash_function (unsigned int id1, unsigned int id2)
+{
+ /* If the number of functions is less than 1000, this gives a unique value
+ for every function id combination. */
+ const int MULTIPLIER = 1000;
+ return id1* MULTIPLIER + id2;
Change to id1 16 | id2
OK for google/gcc-4_6 and google/main branches.
-Easwaran
On Tue, Sep 27, 2011 at 4:07 PM, Sriraman Tallam tmsri...@google.com wrote:
Made all the changes. Attaching new patch of updated files.
On Tue, Sep 27, 2011 at 11:26 AM, Easwaran Raman era...@google.com wrote:
+static inline
Commited.
posting a consolidated patch?
--
Eric Botcazou
Here is the revised patch. Bootstraps and all tests pass on
x86_64-unknown-linux. OK for trunk?
2011-06-23 Easwaran Raman era...@google.com
PR rtl-optimization/49429
PR target/49454
* expr.c (emit_block_move_hints): Mark
On Thu, Jun 23, 2011 at 12:16 PM, Jakub Jelinek ja...@redhat.com wrote:
On Thu, Jun 23, 2011 at 12:02:35PM -0700, Easwaran Raman wrote:
+ if (y_expr)
+ mark_addressable (y_expr);
Please watch formatting, a tab should be used instead of 8 spaces.
+ if (x_expr
On Wed, Jun 22, 2011 at 7:13 AM, Eric Botcazou ebotca...@adacore.com wrote:
I fear this isn't enough considering pass-by-value aggregates that
are callee copied.
It's indeed not sufficient for arguments passed by reference but
callee-copied.
This is PR target/49454. For
,
Easwaran
On Tue, Jun 14, 2011 at 9:34 AM, Jeff Law l...@redhat.com wrote:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 05/10/11 13:18, Easwaran Raman wrote:
I am not sure I understand the problem here. If there is a wild read
from asm, the instruction has the wild_read flag set
Ping.
Diego, David,
Is this patch OK for google/main?
-Easwaran
On Thu, Jun 2, 2011 at 4:48 PM, Easwaran Raman era...@google.com wrote:
Ping.
On Sat, May 14, 2011 at 8:01 AM, Easwaran Raman era...@google.com wrote:
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2011-05/msg00781.html
Ping.
On Sat, May 14, 2011 at 8:01 AM, Easwaran Raman era...@google.com wrote:
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2011-05/msg00781.html
Ping.
On Sat, May 14, 2011 at 8:01 AM, Easwaran Raman era...@google.com wrote:
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2011-05/msg00781.html
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2011-05/msg00781.html
On Tue, May 3, 2011 at 9:40 AM, Easwaran Raman era...@google.com wrote:
On Mon, May 2, 2011 at 8:37 PM, Jeff Law l...@redhat.com wrote:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 04/26/11 16:06, Easwaran Raman wrote:
You're right. The patch has correctness issues. It is not possible
This patch by Silvius Rus replaces calls to certain functions with a
specialized version that uses non-temporal stores based on memory reuse
distance profiling. Bootstraps, no test regressions and the profiling works for
a small test case. Ok for google/main.?
-Easwaran
2011-05-09 Silvius
Backported r172788 and r172837 from trunk to google/main.
2011-05-06 Easwaran Raman era...@google.com
Backport r172837:
* cfgexpand.c (stack_var): Remove OFFSET...
(add_stack_var): ...and its reference here...
(expand_stack_vars): ...and here.
(stack_var_cmp
Thanks. Fixed them (as well as the same issue in some earlier entries).
-Easwaran
On Fri, May 6, 2011 at 11:27 AM, Diego Novillo dnovi...@google.com wrote:
On Fri, May 6, 2011 at 14:22, Easwaran Raman era...@google.com wrote:
Backported r172788 and r172837 from trunk to google/main.
Minor
On Mon, May 2, 2011 at 8:37 PM, Jeff Law l...@redhat.com wrote:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 04/26/11 16:06, Easwaran Raman wrote:
You're right. The patch has correctness issues. It is not possible to
simply not call add_wild_read because it also resets
This patch from Silvius Rus adds support for sampled edge profile collection
to reduce instrumentation run overhead. Bootstraps and no test regressions. Ok
for google/main?
2011-04-28 Silvius Rus silvius@gmail.com
* doc/invoke.texi: Document -fprofile-generate-sampling option.
On Mon, Apr 25, 2011 at 10:03 AM, Jeff Law l...@redhat.com wrote:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 04/22/11 14:19, Easwaran Raman wrote:
Hi,
This patch improves RTL DSE by not assuming that calls read all
memory locations. With this patch, calls are assumed to read any
non
On Thu, Apr 21, 2011 at 3:20 PM, Andrew Pinski pins...@gmail.com wrote:
On Thu, Apr 21, 2011 at 3:18 PM, Easwaran Raman era...@google.com wrote:
When using gcc with a post-assembly tool, we use a wrapper that
invokes the tool and needs to know if the tool's output (another
assembly file) needs
for trunk?
Thanks,
Easwaran
2011-04-22 Easwaran Raman era...@google.com
PR rtl-optimization/44194
* dse.c (header files): Include tree-flow.h.
(group_info): Add fields.
(globals): Add a new variable kill_on_calls.
(get_group_info): Initialize added fields
On Fri, Apr 22, 2011 at 1:26 PM, Jakub Jelinek ja...@redhat.com wrote:
On Fri, Apr 22, 2011 at 01:19:17PM -0700, Easwaran Raman wrote:
The ChangeLog entry has various issues:
2011-04-22 Easwaran Raman era...@google.com
PR rtl-optimization/44194
This should have tab before PR as well
On Thu, Apr 21, 2011 at 8:43 AM, Richard Guenther
richard.guent...@gmail.com wrote:
On Thu, Apr 21, 2011 at 5:22 PM, Michael Matz m...@suse.de wrote:
Hi,
On Wed, 20 Apr 2011, Easwaran Raman wrote:
But you're right - not adding that conflict doesn't actually reduce the
size of bit maps
1 - 100 of 111 matches
Mail list logo
