From: Jan Hubicka <hubicka@ucw.cz>
To: Steven Bosscher <stevenb.gcc@gmail.com>
Cc: Jan Hubicka <hubicka@ucw.cz>, Michael Matz <matz@suse.de>,
Richard Biener <richard.guenther@gmail.com>,
GCC Patches <gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org>, Jeff Law <law@redhat.com>
Subject: Re: [patch][RFC] bitmaps as lists *or* trees
Date: Wed, 06 Mar 2013 18:03:00 -0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20130306180251.GA17360@kam.mff.cuni.cz> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CABu31nOgQ7qx1H7p6cMa4X0BLBqwQLcz_iyQCZLDPDGUD0R-fA@mail.gmail.com>
> On Wed, Mar 6, 2013 at 5:02 PM, Jan Hubicka wrote:
> >>
> >> An interesting question is, how can you identify bitmaps that could
> >> benefit from viewing it as a tree (at least for some time). I have no
> >> ideas here. Something with detailed memory stats, of course, but then
> >> how to derive some measure for a trade-off between list or tree view.
> >> Thoughts?
> >
> > Well, I guess we can simply accumulate the counter on linked list walks (when
> > the one element cache is missed) and divide it by number of iterations. Where
> > this number thends to grow and not be counstant bounded, we have nonlinear
> > behaviour, right?
>
> Well, yes and no. This is not fine-grained enough to see if there are
> specific usages of bitmaps that can be better represented as a
> linked-list or as a tree. But yes, it's a place to start, and it's
> what I've started doing last night for a set of files (large PR test
> cases, cc1-i files, etc.).
Well, I meant with the --enable-gather-detailed-stats code. it should give you
data about individual bitmaps used thorough the compiler.
Honza
>
> Ciao!
> Steven
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2013-03-06 18:03 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 15+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2013-03-05 12:01 Steven Bosscher
2013-03-05 12:32 ` Richard Biener
2013-03-05 14:48 ` Michael Matz
2013-03-05 16:17 ` Steven Bosscher
2013-03-05 22:56 ` Steven Bosscher
2013-03-07 20:18 ` Steven Bosscher
2018-10-17 14:04 ` Richard Biener
2013-03-06 10:18 ` Richard Biener
2013-03-06 16:02 ` Jan Hubicka
2013-03-06 16:06 ` Jan Hubicka
2013-03-06 18:07 ` Steven Bosscher
2013-03-06 17:59 ` Steven Bosscher
2013-03-06 18:03 ` Jan Hubicka [this message]
2013-03-05 14:51 ` Steven Bosscher
2013-03-05 16:03 ` Richard Biener
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=20130306180251.GA17360@kam.mff.cuni.cz \
--to=hubicka@ucw.cz \
--cc=gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org \
--cc=law@redhat.com \
--cc=matz@suse.de \
--cc=richard.guenther@gmail.com \
--cc=stevenb.gcc@gmail.com \
/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).