From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 30870 invoked by alias); 5 Oct 2012 23:45:45 -0000 Received: (qmail 30862 invoked by uid 22791); 5 Oct 2012 23:45:44 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-6.3 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,KHOP_RCVD_TRUST,KHOP_THREADED,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW,RCVD_IN_HOSTKARMA_YE,RP_MATCHES_RCVD X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from mail-oa0-f47.google.com (HELO mail-oa0-f47.google.com) (209.85.219.47) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Fri, 05 Oct 2012 23:45:41 +0000 Received: by mail-oa0-f47.google.com with SMTP id h1so2551992oag.20 for ; Fri, 05 Oct 2012 16:45:40 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type:x-system-of-record:x-gm-message-state; bh=PMoEBPtEtyp6+meC2a5BQzSfAmcMfl/xm7fKtHx+NRg=; b=JcdFIvrnc1dsbb8yxmcGOioSW3jUJ4dRpwxB+CoP0GxR2MYg96DunqJjUqycxO0iVn kol2zuvlWuqsyiUN4gbMrXHKRHzVdNGaB8LKsxiHOs0WRTUjx6lxIxoa+jwMrZjgXgSk CG4rqJYwSNkxYSRUMz7I2po7/LcT/PhHE6LeuLopVhq3Rms7z9yu223YYtVrpr9W0JaZ DfABqgHZrkS0fiTonivsrqS8NBGhXey1e1pu3UoGa3FhavAlJ0RUAyMAtblBJRy1Cfbz saTA5p94eJpEYkbfp/heYiydLJ6xSsComYqW7BdYwALLa6rWjHfkuWuMperjHDwrwdda qbGg== MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.60.29.228 with SMTP id n4mr8513803oeh.27.1349480740446; Fri, 05 Oct 2012 16:45:40 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.182.75.74 with HTTP; Fri, 5 Oct 2012 16:45:40 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <506F6418.2000701@redhat.com> References: <20120307004630.A503DB21B6@azwildcat.mtv.corp.google.com> <4FF7D1C6.90407@redhat.com> <4FF96D0C.5060406@redhat.com> <4FFBF9F5.6020306@redhat.com> <5008708E.1030109@redhat.com> <506F1C5D.9060500@redhat.com> <506F6418.2000701@redhat.com> Date: Fri, 05 Oct 2012 23:45:00 -0000 Message-ID: Subject: Re: User directed Function Multiversioning via Function Overloading (issue5752064) From: Sriraman Tallam To: Jason Merrill Cc: Xinliang David Li , mark@codesourcery.com, nathan@codesourcery.com, "H.J. Lu" , Richard Guenther , Jan Hubicka , Uros Bizjak , reply@codereview.appspotmail.com, GCC Patches Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 X-System-Of-Record: true X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQn1SB8LKei08qivMi+eQ970GoZNPLzjO5QNSGokal+r9oHknFHHU8RLXPegBQktoLvWR2NF0Wf82uNcX1VBRVwphnzsSomoOmHeqUmueEKB1xAzLLSMQIBcvMvlyo8OMY3LXwmtTZoWcEFBmTlTvJRkYUSh6HT2yCwDgLDdhIyBSNoZeKVabsB0BIoFwi8OkI135WMX 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: 2012-10/txt/msg00588.txt.bz2 On Fri, Oct 5, 2012 at 3:50 PM, Jason Merrill wrote: > On 10/05/2012 05:57 PM, Sriraman Tallam wrote: >> >> In general, the dispatcher is always necessary since it is not known >> what function version will be called at compile time. This is true >> whether it is a direct or an indirect call. > > > So you want to compile with lowest common denominator flags and then choose > a faster version at runtime based on the running configuration? I see. > Yes. Thanks, -Sri. > Jason >