public inbox for gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Richard Guenther <richard.guenther@gmail.com>
To: Zhenqiang Chen <zhenqiang.chen@arm.com>
Cc: gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Disable loop2_invariant for -Os
Date: Wed, 27 Jun 2012 09:09:00 -0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <CAFiYyc1qL32NoWXM=KY9xAnrVRzUsTb8i6uPAJrAXB_oOJ46ew@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <4feac6f5.4abd440a.074d.ffffcfbaSMTPIN_ADDED@mx.google.com>

On Wed, Jun 27, 2012 at 10:40 AM, Zhenqiang Chen <zhenqiang.chen@arm.com> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> In general, invariant motion itself can not reduce code size.

It can expose CSE opportunities across loops though.

> But it will
> change the liverange of the invariant, which might lead to more spilling.

"might" - indeed.  I wonder what the trade-off is here ... but given that you
leave tree loop invariant motion enabled it might not make much of a difference.

Still as this is mostly a spilling issue it looks odd to do that generally.  In
fact you could improve things by only disabling motion when that increases
register lifetime - it can after all reduce overall register lifetime:

for (;;)
  inv = inv1 + inv2;
  ... use inv;

to

inv = inv1 + inv2;
for (;;)
  ... use inv;

has register lifetime reduced.

Or at least like I suggest below.

> The patch disables loop2_invariant when optimizing for size.
>
> I measured the code size benefit for four targets based on CSiBE benchmark:
>
> ARM: 0.33%
> MIPS: 1.15%
> PPC: 0.24%
> X86: 0.45%
>
> Is it OK for trunk?
>
> Thanks!
> -Zhenqiang
>
> ChangeLog:
> 2012-06-27  Zhenqiang Chen <zhenqiang.chen@arm.com>
>
>        * loop-init.c (gate_rtl_move_loop_invariants): Disable
> loop2_invariant
>        when optimizing function for size.
>
> diff --git a/gcc/loop-init.c b/gcc/loop-init.c
> index 03f8f61..5d8cf73 100644
> --- a/gcc/loop-init.c
> +++ b/gcc/loop-init.c
> @@ -273,6 +273,12 @@ struct rtl_opt_pass pass_rtl_loop_done =
>  static bool
>  gate_rtl_move_loop_invariants (void)
>  {
> +  /* In general, invariant motion can not reduce code size. But it will
> +     change the liverange of the invariant, which increases the register
> +     pressure and might lead to more spilling.  */
> +  if (optimize_function_for_size_p (cfun))
> +    return false;
> +

Can you do this per loop instead?  Using optimize_loop_nest_for_size_p?

Thanks,
Richard.

>   return flag_move_loop_invariants;
>  }
>
>
>

       reply	other threads:[~2012-06-27  8:53 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 9+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
     [not found] <4feac6f5.4abd440a.074d.ffffcfbaSMTPIN_ADDED@mx.google.com>
2012-06-27  9:09 ` Richard Guenther [this message]
2012-06-28  9:03   ` Zhenqiang Chen
     [not found]   ` <4fec169c.e908b40a.26d1.ffffc3f1SMTPIN_ADDED@mx.google.com>
2012-06-28  9:38     ` Richard Guenther
2012-07-03  8:29       ` Zhenqiang Chen
     [not found]       ` <4ff2ad57.8aa0d80a.5910.ffffb0d6SMTPIN_ADDED@mx.google.com>
2012-07-03  9:32         ` Richard Guenther
2012-07-09  8:40           ` Zhenqiang Chen
     [not found] <4feac6fa.e288440a.73b3.ffffa5c7SMTPIN_ADDED@mx.google.com>
2012-06-27  9:53 ` Steven Bosscher
2012-06-28  9:05   ` Zhenqiang Chen
2012-06-27  8:48 Zhenqiang Chen

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='CAFiYyc1qL32NoWXM=KY9xAnrVRzUsTb8i6uPAJrAXB_oOJ46ew@mail.gmail.com' \
    --to=richard.guenther@gmail.com \
    --cc=gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org \
    --cc=zhenqiang.chen@arm.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).