From: Segher Boessenkool <segher@kernel.crashing.org>
To: Ajit Agarwal <aagarwa1@linux.ibm.com>
Cc: gcc-patches <gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org>,
jeff Law <jeffreyalaw@gmail.com>,
Peter Bergner <bergner@linux.ibm.com>,
jakub Jelinek <jakub@redhat.com>,
Richard Biener <richard.guenther@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 1/4] ree: Default ree pass for O2 and above for rs6000 target.
Date: Wed, 19 Apr 2023 15:00:11 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20230419200011.GG19790@gate.crashing.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <236aab6b-537f-7fb6-125c-220fb63f7521@linux.ibm.com>
Hi!
The subject should be something like
rs6000: Enable REE pass by default
(and no period at the end).
On Wed, Apr 19, 2023 at 11:23:07PM +0530, Ajit Agarwal wrote:
> This is the patch-1 for improving ree pass for rs6000 target.
It actually just enables it :-)
The mail body should be the proposed commit message. Nothing more,
nothing less. If you need (or want) to talk about more things, that is
what a "0/4" message is for (you create that with --cover). Your patch
messages here do not thread properly, how did you create them? Things
work fine if you use git format-patch --thread :-)
> ree: Improve ree pass for rs6000 target.
>
> Add ree pass as a default pass for rs6000 target.
>
> 2023-04-19 Ajit Kumar Agarwal <aagarwa1@linux.ibm.com>
You aren't in MAINTAINERS yet, please fix that first!
>
> gcc/ChangeLog:
>
> * common/config/rs6000/rs6000-common.cc: Add REE pass as a
> default rs6000 target pass for O2 and above.
Why only for -O2? Only when optimising at all makes sense, people use
-O0 only when they want to skip as many optimisations as possible, maybe
because of compilation time concerns, maybe to avoid an ICE or other
bug. Isn't REE *always* a good thing, it never degrades code quality?
Or are there situations where it results in worse code?
Segher
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2023-04-19 20:01 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2023-04-19 17:53 Ajit Agarwal
2023-04-19 20:00 ` Segher Boessenkool [this message]
2023-04-22 13:37 ` Ajit Agarwal
2023-04-24 15:23 ` Peter Bergner
2023-04-24 15:28 ` Jakub Jelinek
2023-04-24 15:36 ` Peter Bergner
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=20230419200011.GG19790@gate.crashing.org \
--to=segher@kernel.crashing.org \
--cc=aagarwa1@linux.ibm.com \
--cc=bergner@linux.ibm.com \
--cc=gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org \
--cc=jakub@redhat.com \
--cc=jeffreyalaw@gmail.com \
--cc=richard.guenther@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).