public inbox for gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "Yuan, Pengfei" <ypf@pku.edu.cn>
To: "Richard Biener" <richard.guenther@gmail.com>
Cc: "Jan Hubicka" <hubicka@ucw.cz>, "GCC Patches" <gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH, 5.x/6.x/7.x] Be more conservative in early inliner if FDO is enabled
Date: Wed, 21 Sep 2016 12:44:00 -0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <3cf014ea.1b70.1574ca376b7.Coremail.ypf@pku.edu.cn> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAFiYyc1bnnVm1a5JOH2ww9hq-YSdUe698H_++qmdrJttfWYeFA@mail.gmail.com>

> > Btw, It occurs to me that then win in code-size might be purely due to the
> > smaller base value for the TU size we use to compute the maximum unit
> > growth with ... any idea how to improve it on this side?  Say, computing
> > the TU size before early optimization (uh, probably not ...)
> >
> > That said, the inliner always completely fills its budged, that is, increase
> > the unit by max-unit-growth?
> 
> What I'm trying to say is that rather than limiting early inlining we should
> maybe decrease inline-unit-growth when FDO is in effect?  Because we
> can better control where the inlining goes.  If there is over 8% reduction
> in size benchmarking (unpatched) compiler on Firefox with FDO and
> --param inline-unit-growth=12 might show if the results are the same.

FYI, with --param inline-unit-growth=12 --param early-inlining-insns=14,
the code size reduction is only 1.1%.

Yuan, Pengfei

> Richard.
> 
> > Richard.

  parent reply	other threads:[~2016-09-21 12:06 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 23+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2016-09-10  6:41 Yuan, Pengfei
2016-09-14 10:35 ` Richard Biener
2016-09-15  3:17   ` Yuan, Pengfei
2016-09-15  8:44     ` Richard Biener
2016-09-15 10:08       ` Yuan, Pengfei
2016-09-16  5:52       ` Yuan, Pengfei
2016-09-16  8:09         ` Jan Hubicka
2016-09-16  9:01           ` Yuan, Pengfei
2016-09-16  9:21             ` Richard Biener
2016-09-16  9:37               ` Jan Hubicka
2016-09-16 12:00                 ` Yuan, Pengfei
2016-09-16 12:56                   ` Jan Hubicka
2016-09-20  8:53                     ` Yuan, Pengfei
2016-09-20 11:44                     ` Richard Biener
2016-09-20 11:58                       ` Richard Biener
2016-09-20 12:09                         ` Yuan, Pengfei
2016-09-20 12:19                           ` Richard Biener
2016-09-20 13:10                             ` Yuan, Pengfei
2016-09-21 12:44                         ` Yuan, Pengfei [this message]
2016-09-26  4:03                   ` Yuan, Pengfei
2016-10-10  2:23                   ` PING: [PATCH] " Yuan, Pengfei
2016-10-10  9:55                     ` Richard Biener
2016-10-10 10:52                       ` Yuan, Pengfei

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=3cf014ea.1b70.1574ca376b7.Coremail.ypf@pku.edu.cn \
    --to=ypf@pku.edu.cn \
    --cc=gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org \
    --cc=hubicka@ucw.cz \
    --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).