public inbox for gcc-bugs@sourceware.org
help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "rguenther at suse dot de" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug tree-optimization/59660] We fail to optimize common boolean checks pre-inlining
Date: Tue, 07 Jan 2014 13:13:00 -0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <bug-59660-4-cKT5Ktxp0J@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <bug-59660-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59660
--- Comment #3 from rguenther at suse dot de <rguenther at suse dot de> ---
On Tue, 7 Jan 2014, hubicka at ucw dot cz wrote:
> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59660
>
> --- Comment #2 from Jan Hubicka <hubicka at ucw dot cz> ---
> > I have noticed these, too (-Og is pessimzed by them). The pattern is generated
> > by gimplifying.
>
> I wondered why we can't simply update gimplifier to not produce them?
> (this is what I wanted to look into today, it seems pretty common pattern
> confusing inliner).
> For sure we should better also handle it either in cfg-cleanup or copyprop
> for cases that arrise as a result of other optimizations, but it seems it
> would speed things up if we did not wrap each predicate calls in its own three
> BBs.
Not all testcases can be handled at gimplification time IIRC. Which
means "testcases welcome" first, so we can look at them individually.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2014-01-07 13:13 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 19+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2014-01-02 20:33 [Bug tree-optimization/59660] New: " hubicka at gcc dot gnu.org
2014-01-02 20:33 ` [Bug tree-optimization/59660] " hubicka at gcc dot gnu.org
2014-01-07 11:39 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
2014-01-07 13:04 ` hubicka at ucw dot cz
2014-01-07 13:13 ` rguenther at suse dot de [this message]
2014-01-07 15:07 ` hubicka at ucw dot cz
2014-01-07 15:10 ` rguenther at suse dot de
2014-01-08 13:09 ` hubicka at ucw dot cz
2014-01-08 14:03 ` rguenther at suse dot de
2014-01-08 17:23 ` hubicka at ucw dot cz
2014-01-08 18:37 ` hubicka at ucw dot cz
2014-01-09 9:52 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
2014-01-09 13:12 ` hubicka at ucw dot cz
2021-06-01 22:16 ` pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org
2021-09-06 0:36 ` pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org
2023-04-09 23:27 ` pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org
2023-04-09 23:40 ` pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org
2023-06-14 16:28 ` pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org
2023-08-18 20:42 ` pinskia 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-59660-4-cKT5Ktxp0J@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).