From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 5180 invoked by alias); 26 Oct 2012 17:29:32 -0000 Received: (qmail 4923 invoked by uid 48); 26 Oct 2012 17:29:04 -0000 From: "steven at gcc dot gnu.org" To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org Subject: [Bug middle-end/37448] gcc 4.3.1 cannot compile big function Date: Fri, 26 Oct 2012 17:29:00 -0000 X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC X-Bugzilla-Type: changed X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None X-Bugzilla-Product: gcc X-Bugzilla-Component: middle-end X-Bugzilla-Keywords: compile-time-hog, memory-hog X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal X-Bugzilla-Who: steven at gcc dot gnu.org X-Bugzilla-Status: NEW X-Bugzilla-Priority: P2 X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org X-Bugzilla-Target-Milestone: --- X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields: CC Message-ID: In-Reply-To: References: X-Bugzilla-URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/ Auto-Submitted: auto-generated Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" MIME-Version: 1.0 Mailing-List: contact gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: Sender: gcc-bugs-owner@gcc.gnu.org X-SW-Source: 2012-10/txt/msg02488.txt.bz2 http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=37448 Steven Bosscher changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |steven at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment #49 from Steven Bosscher 2012-10-26 17:28:58 UTC --- (In reply to comment #47) > Hmm, good timming. I just started looking into re-tunning inliner > heuristics for 4.8 so I should look again into this inline bomb... > Looks like inliner did not get faster ;) While everything else did get faster. Much of the work from PR54146 also helps for this PR. But the inliner heuristics are even more insane than this test case. What are the reasons for your aversion against incrementally updating the inliner heuristics?