[Bug tree-optimization/34940] contained subroutines called only once are not inlined

[Bug tree-optimization/34940] contained subroutines called only once are not inlined

[hubicka at gcc dot gnu.org]

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=34940

Jan Hubicka <hubicka at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
                 CC|                            |burnus@net-b.de, hubicka at
                   |                            |gcc dot gnu.org, kargl at
                   |                            |gcc dot gnu.org

--- Comment #6 from Jan Hubicka <hubicka at gcc dot gnu.org> 2010-11-10 18:04:17 UTC ---
Function is static, that seems OK.
We inline it with ./xgcc -B ./ -O2 t.f90 -S  --param large-stack-frame=2000

We are somewhat stupid here, since the call happens all the time and thus stack
frame growth limits don't need to apply.  I can implement this if this is
common case for fortran.  How commonly we run into these io structs?
We can also bump large stack limits to make fortran I/O to fit in.

Honza

[Bug tree-optimization/34940] contained subroutines called only once are not inlined

[hubicka at gcc dot gnu.org]

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=34940

Jan Hubicka <hubicka at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
         AssignedTo|unassigned at gcc dot       |hubicka at gcc dot gnu.org
                   |gnu.org                     |

--- Comment #7 from Jan Hubicka <hubicka at gcc dot gnu.org> 2010-11-10 18:06:49 UTC ---
Assigning to myself. I plan to do IPA noreturn discovery that will track when
function has to be called and we can use that info there too.

[Bug tree-optimization/34940] contained subroutines called only once are not inlined

[jakub at gcc dot gnu.org]

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=34940

Jakub Jelinek <jakub at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
                 CC|                            |jakub at gcc dot gnu.org

--- Comment #8 from Jakub Jelinek <jakub at gcc dot gnu.org> 2010-11-10 19:12:52 UTC ---
The large Fortran IO parameter block should actually be always coalesceable
with all other IO parameter blocks in the same function (including all inlined
IO), as it should be live just around each single IO and die at the end of IO
block.

[Bug tree-optimization/34940] contained subroutines called only once are not inlined

[hubicka at ucw dot cz]

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=34940

--- Comment #9 from Jan Hubicka <hubicka at ucw dot cz> 2010-11-10 22:35:46 UTC ---
The inline heuristics should take that into account. But at the moment
io block simply always prevent inlining function with IO into function without
IO.
We consider function with more than 256 bytes of stack frame to have large
frame
and those are.  Why it needs that much of stack space at first place?

[Bug tree-optimization/34940] contained subroutines called only once are not inlined

[jakub at gcc dot gnu.org]

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=34940

--- Comment #10 from Jakub Jelinek <jakub at gcc dot gnu.org> 2010-11-10 22:43:31 UTC ---
Because one IO command is split into several function calls and a state has to
be preserved in between those.

[Bug tree-optimization/34940] contained subroutines called only once are not inlined

[hubicka at ucw dot cz]

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=34940

--- Comment #11 from Jan Hubicka <hubicka at ucw dot cz> 2010-11-10 22:50:08 UTC ---
Ok, it might be interesting to run some fortran benchmarks with the
large-stack-frame parameter
bumped up.  If it helps, I think we can just do so for 4.6.x

[Bug tree-optimization/34940] contained subroutines called only once are not inlined

[rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org]

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=34940

--- Comment #12 from Richard Guenther <rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org> 2010-11-10 22:53:46 UTC ---
Note that the IO block escapes and thus cannot be coalesced with others in
the same function.  I had a frontend patch to re-use the same IO struct
across multiple calls but that was rejected on the grounds of future
implementation of async IO.

[Bug tree-optimization/34940] contained subroutines called only once are not inlined

[rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org]

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=34940

--- Comment #13 from Richard Guenther <rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org> 2010-11-10 22:54:51 UTC ---
Btw, the old "kill stmt" idea would be a useful thing to insert for the
frontend
to mark the end of life of IO struct contents.

[Bug tree-optimization/34940] contained subroutines called only once are not inlined

[hubicka at ucw dot cz]

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=34940

--- Comment #14 from Jan Hubicka <hubicka at ucw dot cz> 2010-11-10 23:05:25 UTC ---
> Note that the IO block escapes and thus cannot be coalesced with others in
> the same function.  I had a frontend patch to re-use the same IO struct
> across multiple calls but that was rejected on the grounds of future
> implementation of async IO.

I think inline heuristics ignore this fact and just assume overlap across
sibling calls
that gets inlined.  Not terribly realistic but not terribly bad either.

[Bug tree-optimization/34940] contained subroutines called only once are not inlined

[Joost.VandeVondele at mat dot ethz.ch]

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=34940

Joost VandeVondele <Joost.VandeVondele at mat dot ethz.ch> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
   Last reconfirmed|2008-01-23 11:27:01         |2012-06-29 11:27:01

--- Comment #15 from Joost VandeVondele <Joost.VandeVondele at mat dot ethz.ch> 2012-06-29 14:52:44 UTC ---
no inlining with 4.8 either

[Bug tree-optimization/34940] contained subroutines called only once are not inlined

[Joost.VandeVondele at mat dot ethz.ch]

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=34940

Joost VandeVondele <Joost.VandeVondele at mat dot ethz.ch> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
   Last reconfirmed|2012-06-29 11:27:01         |2013-03-29
                 CC|                            |Joost.VandeVondele at mat
                   |                            |dot ethz.ch
      Known to fail|                            |4.9.0

--- Comment #16 from Joost VandeVondele <Joost.VandeVondele at mat dot ethz.ch> 2013-03-29 08:58:42 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #6)
> Function is static, that seems OK.
> We inline it with ./xgcc -B ./ -O2 t.f90 -S  --param large-stack-frame=2000
> 
> We are somewhat stupid here, since the call happens all the time and thus stack
> frame growth limits don't need to apply.  I can implement this if this is
> common case for fortran.  How commonly we run into these io structs?
> We can also bump large stack limits to make fortran I/O to fit in.
> 
> Honza

I think it would make sense to implement this, if easy enough. It could be a
common pattern for contained subroutines and private module procedures

[Bug tree-optimization/34940] contained subroutines called only once are not inlined

[pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org]

-- 

pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
                 CC|                            |pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot
                   |                            |org
           Severity|normal                      |enhancement


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=34940

[Bug tree-optimization/34940] contained subroutines called only once are not inlined

[jv244 at cam dot ac dot uk]

------- Comment #5 from jv244 at cam dot ac dot uk  2008-01-23 17:22 -------
just a note, ifort does inline the function cs1


-- 


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=34940

[Bug tree-optimization/34940] contained subroutines called only once are not inlined

[jv244 at cam dot ac dot uk]

------- Comment #4 from jv244 at cam dot ac dot uk  2008-01-23 15:45 -------
(In reply to comment #2)
> It's considered too big and it's not static.
> 

not sure if my C is good enough to reply, but CS1 is visible only from within
the subroutine S1. That's somewhat similar to (or stricter than) 'static' ?


-- 


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=34940

[Bug tree-optimization/34940] contained subroutines called only once are not inlined

[rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org]

------- Comment #3 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org  2008-01-23 13:55 -------
Considering cs1 with 52 insns
 to be inlined into s1
 Estimated growth after inlined into all callees is -13 insns.
 Estimated badness is 86, frequency 1.00.
 Not inlining into s1:--param large-stack-frame-growth limit reached.

the fortran IO param structure is blowing the stack limit ;)


-- 


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=34940

[Bug tree-optimization/34940] contained subroutines called only once are not inlined

[rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org]

------- Comment #2 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org  2008-01-23 13:54 -------
It's considered too big and it's not static.


-- 


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=34940

[Bug tree-optimization/34940] contained subroutines called only once are not inlined

[steven at gcc dot gnu dot org]

------- Comment #1 from steven at gcc dot gnu dot org  2008-01-23 11:27 -------
It is not always a win.  A function called once on a cold path should not be
inlined for e.g. icache reasons.

For your test case however, CS1 should have been inlined.


-- 

steven at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Status|UNCONFIRMED                 |NEW
     Ever Confirmed|0                           |1
   Last reconfirmed|0000-00-00 00:00:00         |2008-01-23 11:27:01
               date|                            |


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=34940