From: Segher Boessenkool <segher@kernel.crashing.org>
To: Eric Botcazou <ebotcazou@adacore.com>
Cc: gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/3] function: Do the CLEANUP_EXPENSIVE after shrink-wrapping, not before
Date: Tue, 17 May 2016 09:18:00 -0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20160517091758.GC18363@gate.crashing.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20909191.oPg4YIUu4L@polaris>
On Tue, May 17, 2016 at 11:08:53AM +0200, Eric Botcazou wrote:
> > How would it? The shrink-wrapping algorithms do not much care how you
> > write your control flow. The only things I can think of are drastic
> > things like removing some dead code, or converting a switch to a direct
> > jump, but those had better be done for the immediately preceding passes
> > already (register allocation).
>
> But the compiler didn't wait until after shrink-wrapping to emit multiple
> epilogues and can still do that w/o shrink-wrapping.
It will only ever generate a single epilogue (unless you also count
sibcall epilogues), and that is done after shrink-wrapping. Or you mean
something else and I just don't see it.
> > I can put back a cleanup_cfg (0) in front if that seems less tricky
> > (or just safer)?
>
> I think you need to evaluate the effects of the change on a set of sources.
Yeah I'll do that, thanks for the idea.
Segher
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2016-05-17 9:18 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 28+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2016-05-17 1:09 Segher Boessenkool
2016-05-17 1:09 ` [PATCH 3/3] function: Restructure *logue insertion Segher Boessenkool
2016-05-19 8:04 ` Segher Boessenkool
2016-05-19 22:00 ` Jeff Law
2016-05-19 22:20 ` Segher Boessenkool
2016-05-20 9:28 ` Thomas Schwinge
2016-05-20 13:21 ` Thomas Schwinge
2016-05-20 14:47 ` Nathan Sidwell
2016-05-20 15:35 ` Segher Boessenkool
2016-05-20 21:27 ` Segher Boessenkool
2016-05-17 1:09 ` [PATCH 2/3] function: Factor out make_*logue_seq Segher Boessenkool
2016-05-17 20:35 ` Jeff Law
2016-05-18 17:17 ` H.J. Lu
2016-05-18 18:11 ` Segher Boessenkool
2016-05-18 18:20 ` H.J. Lu
2016-05-18 18:24 ` H.J. Lu
2016-05-18 18:35 ` Segher Boessenkool
2016-05-18 22:13 ` Segher Boessenkool
2016-05-19 7:16 ` Jakub Jelinek
2016-05-19 7:28 ` Segher Boessenkool
2016-05-19 7:41 ` Jakub Jelinek
2016-05-19 17:20 ` Jeff Law
2016-05-17 8:06 ` [PATCH 1/3] function: Do the CLEANUP_EXPENSIVE after shrink-wrapping, not before Eric Botcazou
2016-05-17 8:47 ` Segher Boessenkool
2016-05-17 9:08 ` Eric Botcazou
2016-05-17 9:18 ` Segher Boessenkool [this message]
2016-05-17 22:23 ` Segher Boessenkool
2016-05-17 22:34 ` Eric Botcazou
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=20160517091758.GC18363@gate.crashing.org \
--to=segher@kernel.crashing.org \
--cc=ebotcazou@adacore.com \
--cc=gcc-patches@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).