public inbox for gcc-bugs@sourceware.org help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "linkw at gcc dot gnu.org" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org> To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org Subject: [Bug target/108184] New: rs6000: Use optimize_function_for_speed_p too early Date: Tue, 20 Dec 2022 03:01:59 +0000 [thread overview] Message-ID: <bug-108184-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/> (raw) https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108184 Bug ID: 108184 Summary: rs6000: Use optimize_function_for_speed_p too early Product: gcc Version: 13.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: target Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org Reporter: linkw at gcc dot gnu.org Target Milestone: --- In the review of patch [1] for PR105818, Honza pointed out "I think we should generally avoid doing decisions about size/speed optimizations so early since the setting may change due to attributes or profile feedback..." I agreed that the current uses of optimize_function_for_speed_p in function rs6000_option_override_internal are too early and can be inaccurate. I tried to make the below test case to demonstrate it. Compiled with -mdejagnu-tune=power8 -O3: __attribute__ ((cold)) int fusion_short (short *p) { return p[0x12345]; } Since the function is attributed with cold, it's considered not to optimize for speed, so we shouldn't break the sign extended loads and fuse it with the addis, that is it's unexpected to see extsh generated but we have: addis 3,3,0x2 lhz 3,18058(3) extsh 3,3 [1] https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2022-November/607527.html
next reply other threads:[~2022-12-20 3:02 UTC|newest] Thread overview: 5+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top 2022-12-20 3:01 linkw at gcc dot gnu.org [this message] 2022-12-20 3:04 ` [Bug target/108184] " linkw at gcc dot gnu.org 2023-04-26 6:57 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org 2023-07-27 9:24 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org 2024-05-21 9:13 ` jakub 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-108184-4@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: linkBe 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).