From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 20646 invoked by alias); 31 Mar 2004 20:01:30 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: Sender: gcc-bugs-owner@gcc.gnu.org Received: (qmail 20630 invoked by alias); 31 Mar 2004 20:01:27 -0000 Date: Wed, 31 Mar 2004 20:01:00 -0000 Message-ID: <20040331200127.20629.qmail@sources.redhat.com> From: "rguenth at tat dot physik dot uni-tuebingen dot de" To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org In-Reply-To: <20040120183908.13776.kgardas@objectsecurity.com> References: <20040120183908.13776.kgardas@objectsecurity.com> Reply-To: gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org Subject: [Bug c++/13776] [tree-ssa] Many C++ compile-time regression in 3.5-tree-ssa 040120 X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC X-SW-Source: 2004-03/txt/msg03544.txt.bz2 List-Id: ------- Additional Comments From rguenth at tat dot physik dot uni-tuebingen dot de 2004-03-31 20:01 ------- Subject: Re: [tree-ssa] Many C++ compile-time regression in 3.5-tree-ssa 040120 zack at codesourcery dot com wrote: > ------- Additional Comments From zack at codesourcery dot com 2004-03-31 19:53 ------- > Subject: Re: [tree-ssa] Many C++ compile-time regression in > 3.5-tree-ssa 040120 > > "rguenth at tat dot physik dot uni-tuebingen dot de" writes: > > >>We have a lot of pointer hashing in gcc now and I see the above, too. >>We can possibly micro-optimize the pointer hashing by introducing a >>"specialization" of the libiberty hashfn for pointers where we can >>inline both the hashing function and the comparison function. It will >>introduce some code duplication, though (if this only was using C++ and >>templates...). > > > Something I've wanted to do for a long time is do poor-man's templates > on hashtab.[ch] with macros. But I never seem to get sufficient round > tuits. I think it would pay for pointer hashing only, as this is the main use. I did some experiments some time ago with a stripped down pointer-only hash just replacing the walk_tree hashtab and it still was #1 in the profile with little change in time (but I didn't measure overall performance change). Richard. -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=13776