From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 28811 invoked by alias); 27 Sep 2018 08:56:42 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gcc-patches-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: Sender: gcc-patches-owner@gcc.gnu.org Received: (qmail 28799 invoked by uid 89); 27 Sep 2018 08:56:41 -0000 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-1.4 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,KAM_LAZY_DOMAIN_SECURITY autolearn=no version=3.3.2 spammy=online, HContent-Transfer-Encoding:8bit X-HELO: nikam.ms.mff.cuni.cz Received: from nikam.ms.mff.cuni.cz (HELO nikam.ms.mff.cuni.cz) (195.113.20.16) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.93/v0.84-503-g423c35a) with ESMTP; Thu, 27 Sep 2018 08:56:39 +0000 Received: by nikam.ms.mff.cuni.cz (Postfix, from userid 16202) id 7FD405435C4; Thu, 27 Sep 2018 10:56:37 +0200 (CEST) Date: Thu, 27 Sep 2018 08:58:00 -0000 From: Jan Hubicka To: Alexander Monakov Cc: Qing Zhao , gcc Patches , jeff Law , Richard Guenther , Jakub Jelinek , andrew Pinski , martin Sebor Subject: Re: [PATCH][Middle-end][Version 4]Add a new option to control inlining only on static functions Message-ID: <20180927085637.GI61973@kam.mff.cuni.cz> References: <7f314cc6-8cd3-a6f2-27b1-df4ef637542e@gmail.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.23 (2014-03-12) X-SW-Source: 2018-09/txt/msg01636.txt.bz2 > On Wed, 26 Sep 2018, Qing Zhao wrote: > > The request is for application developers who want to use gcc's online > > patching feature. > > > > Today, developers can turn off inlining and deliver just the patched routine. They > > can also allow all inlining and deliver the patched routine and all the routines > > that the patched routine was inlined into. > > > > completely turning off inlining will sacrifice too much run-time performance. completely > > enable inlining, on the other hand, will have the potential issues with code size, complexity and > > debuggability for the online patching. > > > > the proposed option provides a compromised solution for the above issues. and enable more > > developers to utilize gcc’s online patching feature. > > From this explanation it sounds to me that what you really need is -Os-like > behavior for IPA passes, without enabling -Os for gimple/rtl passes, as I > mentioned in my previous email. Honza, how does that sound? How -Os is related? We will still do things like inlining or cloning of functions if we expect code size to decrease (that may happen if arguments become dead) Honza > > > > If the original issue is that inlining duplicates code, wouldn't it be better > > > solved by a switch that instructs inlining heuristics to inline as if for -Os, > > > without enabling -Os for other passes? > > Alexander