From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 32674 invoked by alias); 10 Dec 2013 09:20:57 -0000 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 Received: (qmail 32636 invoked by uid 55); 10 Dec 2013 09:20:54 -0000 From: "hubicka at ucw dot cz" To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org Subject: [Bug ipa/58721] [4.9 Regression] The subroutine perdida is no longer inlined in fatigue.f90 Date: Tue, 10 Dec 2013 09:20:00 -0000 X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC X-Bugzilla-Type: changed X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None X-Bugzilla-Product: gcc X-Bugzilla-Component: ipa X-Bugzilla-Version: 4.9.0 X-Bugzilla-Keywords: missed-optimization X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal X-Bugzilla-Who: hubicka at ucw dot cz X-Bugzilla-Status: ASSIGNED X-Bugzilla-Priority: P1 X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: hubicka at gcc dot gnu.org X-Bugzilla-Target-Milestone: 4.9.0 X-Bugzilla-Flags: X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields: Message-ID: In-Reply-To: References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Bugzilla-URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/ Auto-Submitted: auto-generated MIME-Version: 1.0 X-SW-Source: 2013-12/txt/msg00820.txt.bz2 http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58721 --- Comment #14 from Jan Hubicka --- > Actually, I would argue that the middle-end should be smart enough to give a > branch that is guaranteed to never return a negligible probability (independent > of the builtin_expect). It can only be mis-predicted once. For predicting branches, we have gimple predict_stmt. If we need to annotate values with higher probability, I will implement the extension into bulitin_expect to handle them. (i.e. adding internal only second argument specifying the predictor) Sounds sane?