public inbox for gcc-bugs@sourceware.org
help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "law at gcc dot gnu.org" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug tree-optimization/103388] [12 Regression] missed optimization for dead code elimination at -O3 (trunk vs 11.2.0)
Date: Tue, 18 Jan 2022 15:28:59 +0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <bug-103388-4-chZni3Qz9v@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <bug-103388-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103388

--- Comment #5 from Jeffrey A. Law <law at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
We thread one edge at a time, so we don't know ahead of time how many copies
there would be.

It could be restructured to go ahead and register these threads, then compute
the copy cost on a more global basis.  That would allow us to bump up the
threshold to register the thread, but still reject things later if the cost
appears to be too high.

The book keeping necessary to do that would actually be step #0 for the real
solution which would be to fix the new copier to coalesce cases where multiple
incoming edges thread to the same outgoing edge in a manner similar to what
tree-ssa-threadupdate does.

  parent reply	other threads:[~2022-01-18 15:29 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 10+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2021-11-23 18:21 [Bug tree-optimization/103388] New: [12 Regression] missed optimization for dead code elimination at -O3 (vs. -O2) theodort at inf dot ethz.ch
2021-11-23 19:19 ` [Bug tree-optimization/103388] " aldyh at gcc dot gnu.org
2021-11-23 19:31 ` aldyh at gcc dot gnu.org
2021-11-23 23:18 ` law at gcc dot gnu.org
2021-11-24  8:50 ` [Bug tree-optimization/103388] [12 Regression] missed optimization for dead code elimination at -O3 (trunk vs 11.2.0) rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
2022-01-18 14:24 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
2022-01-18 15:28 ` law at gcc dot gnu.org [this message]
2022-05-06  8:31 ` [Bug tree-optimization/103388] [12/13 " jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
2022-07-26 13:09 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
2023-05-08 12:23 ` [Bug tree-optimization/103388] [12/13/14 " rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=bug-103388-4-chZni3Qz9v@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/ \
    --to=gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org \
    --cc=gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body. 
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).