From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 3258 invoked by alias); 15 Apr 2011 10:10:05 -0000 Received: (qmail 3227 invoked by uid 22791); 15 Apr 2011 10:10:04 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-2.3 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,FREEMAIL_FROM,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW,RFC_ABUSE_POST X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from mail-wy0-f175.google.com (HELO mail-wy0-f175.google.com) (74.125.82.175) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Fri, 15 Apr 2011 10:09:57 +0000 Received: by wye20 with SMTP id 20so2542714wye.20 for ; Fri, 15 Apr 2011 03:09:56 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.227.39.66 with SMTP id f2mr1874190wbe.2.1302862196284; Fri, 15 Apr 2011 03:09:56 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.227.0.140 with HTTP; Fri, 15 Apr 2011 03:09:56 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <20110415092929.GB911@atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz> References: <20110413222034.GA12767@kam.mff.cuni.cz> <20110415092929.GB911@atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz> Date: Fri, 15 Apr 2011 10:38:00 -0000 Message-ID: Subject: Re: More of ipa-inline housekeeping From: Richard Guenther To: Jan Hubicka Cc: gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable 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: 2011-04/txt/msg01161.txt.bz2 2011/4/15 Jan Hubicka : >> > >> > I fixed this on the and added sanity check that the fields are initial= ized. >> > This has shown problem with early inliner iteration fixed thusly and f= act that >> > early inliner is attempting to compute overall growth at a time the in= line >> > parameters are not computed for functions not visited by early optimiz= ations >> > yet. We previously agreed that early inliner should not try to do that= (as this >> > leads to early inliner inlining functions called once that should be d= eferred >> > for later consieration). =A0I just hope it won't cause benchmarks to >> > regress too much ;) >> >> Yeah, we agreed to that. =A0And I forgot about it as it wasn't part of t= he >> early inliner reorg (which was supposed to be a 1:1 transform). > > Today C++ results shows some regressions, but nothing earthshaking. =A0So= I think it is good > idea to drop this feature of early inliner since it is not really systema= tic. > There is also great improvement on LTO SPEC2000, but I tend to hope it is= unrelated change. > Perhaps your aliasing? I doubt SPEC2k uses VLAs or alloca, does it? Might be the DSE improvements, but I'm not sure. Richard. > Honza >