From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 10600 invoked by alias); 5 Apr 2008 16:54:10 -0000 Received: (qmail 10590 invoked by uid 22791); 5 Apr 2008 16:54:10 -0000 X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from wf-out-1314.google.com (HELO wf-out-1314.google.com) (209.85.200.172) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.31) with ESMTP; Sat, 05 Apr 2008 16:53:38 +0000 Received: by wf-out-1314.google.com with SMTP id 28so720200wfc.14 for ; Sat, 05 Apr 2008 09:53:37 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.142.83.4 with SMTP id g4mr1684570wfb.103.1207414417011; Sat, 05 Apr 2008 09:53:37 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.142.100.19 with HTTP; Sat, 5 Apr 2008 09:53:36 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <84fc9c000804050953o429fde26jb3938827ff9dc5a@mail.gmail.com> Date: Sat, 05 Apr 2008 17:36:00 -0000 From: "Richard Guenther" To: "Jan Hubicka" Subject: Re: Patch ping... Cc: gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org In-Reply-To: <20080405162606.GA22594@atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline References: <20080405162606.GA22594@atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz> X-IsSubscribed: yes 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 X-SW-Source: 2008-04/txt/msg00455.txt.bz2 On Sat, Apr 5, 2008 at 6:26 PM, Jan Hubicka wrote: > Hi, > I would like to ping the BRANCH_COST patch > http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc/2008-03/msg00137.html > > I hope to proceed with updating GCC to optimize cold blocks in same way > as -Os and explicitely marked hot functions in -Os code for speed. > For this I need to populate RTL cost interfaces with the profile info > and teach expansion about it. > This is taking quite some years now, I realize it might not be clear > what I am precisely shooting for, so I will also add wiki page. I think the patch makes sense (BRANCH_COST is special anyway compared to other isns cost), but I'd like to see the bigger picture as well here. In particular, BRANCH_COST (hot, predictable), why isn't that simply BRANCH_COST (optimize_size_p, predictable) matching what I possibly expect for the other cost interface (insn_cost (optimize_size_p, rtx)). Thanks, Richard.