From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com (us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com [170.10.129.124]) by sourceware.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 9CD7C3858D20 for ; Wed, 27 Mar 2024 16:02:43 +0000 (GMT) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.4.2 sourceware.org 9CD7C3858D20 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=redhat.com Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=redhat.com ARC-Filter: OpenARC Filter v1.0.0 sourceware.org 9CD7C3858D20 Authentication-Results: server2.sourceware.org; arc=none smtp.remote-ip=170.10.129.124 ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=sourceware.org; s=key; t=1711555366; cv=none; b=LrCYdQYN2BWVPEDCkvPXWIwma38oV72UD9kKN9WhgGL6Whc2feqPUhvnNglHPpsOwAcHyYUEILf+tk1vZdsEiOEOlDqyDftUwyvJBJ9KW0R38JlEJsn13cTq2+FPsnnubeXnBrApYtcG6rHSvhYjTLyMngZwK2PsGTnffkh06sc= ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=sourceware.org; s=key; t=1711555366; c=relaxed/simple; bh=1C9fjN2/FgYCuV4LBworjwgUEGpGh1q5xzN0vDVaj+0=; h=DKIM-Signature:Date:From:To:Subject:Message-ID:MIME-Version; b=RJptJKlVJUg5tx8kkaxgFrovcX2/7RClxK2/qet1HLsSqRdGyHBXCIRwXv/e+vR7epO+QNWY8StZaYHJcSS+Skui6R6UyTlN7R2mKFFaPjanvojJCdEUMWrKTH181NmBOMarhmoHZSEjFxVl6Nv5fFeKzSYvogrkONe2Uv2o8W4= ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; server2.sourceware.org DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=redhat.com; s=mimecast20190719; t=1711555363; h=from:from:reply-to:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date: message-id:message-id:to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version: content-type:content-type:in-reply-to:in-reply-to: references:references; bh=kFX7gXfG8G7tfAPTjomApUM52HQqZtBW+UmMra6vctg=; b=aMvEtmFPlEIytWbZkia9LUm4y0luR8t4LFFeGAbHSRueG999E01Sj4tx5Pq0PQQ6Vr5AQj cyWj8z9yJkSMM+EDn0B9I+EoydB1mATinna5ox8EnEK428D7K/dpqB0UGWP10W9/WY0325 kcVvcDRqhRjvhRSaYSoHEzSXWsioZC0= Received: from mimecast-mx02.redhat.com (mx-ext.redhat.com [66.187.233.73]) by relay.mimecast.com with ESMTP with STARTTLS (version=TLSv1.3, cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id us-mta-3-QNrqfy1ZOp66KUYBOPZ5yQ-1; Wed, 27 Mar 2024 12:02:38 -0400 X-MC-Unique: QNrqfy1ZOp66KUYBOPZ5yQ-1 Received: from smtp.corp.redhat.com (int-mx02.intmail.prod.int.rdu2.redhat.com [10.11.54.2]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by mimecast-mx02.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 0B7E83C36810; Wed, 27 Mar 2024 16:02:38 +0000 (UTC) Received: from tucnak.zalov.cz (unknown [10.39.192.57]) by smtp.corp.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id BA739400D5C6; Wed, 27 Mar 2024 16:02:37 +0000 (UTC) Received: from tucnak.zalov.cz (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by tucnak.zalov.cz (8.17.1/8.17.1) with ESMTPS id 42RG2Gar1777916 (version=TLSv1.3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT); Wed, 27 Mar 2024 17:02:16 +0100 Received: (from jakub@localhost) by tucnak.zalov.cz (8.17.1/8.17.1/Submit) id 42RG2Fuk1777915; Wed, 27 Mar 2024 17:02:15 +0100 Date: Wed, 27 Mar 2024 17:02:15 +0100 From: Jakub Jelinek To: Richard Biener Cc: gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] middle-end/114480 - IDF compute is slow Message-ID: Reply-To: Jakub Jelinek References: <96606.124032711422300395@us-mta-154.us.mimecast.lan> MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <96606.124032711422300395@us-mta-154.us.mimecast.lan> X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 3.4.1 on 10.11.54.2 X-Mimecast-Spam-Score: 0 X-Mimecast-Originator: redhat.com Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline X-Spam-Status: No, score=-9.6 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIMWL_WL_HIGH,DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,DKIM_VALID_EF,GIT_PATCH_0,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE,RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H4,RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_NONE,TXREP autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.6 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.6 (2021-04-09) on server2.sourceware.org List-Id: On Wed, Mar 27, 2024 at 04:42:21PM +0100, Richard Biener wrote: > PR middle-end/114480 > * cfganal.cc (compute_idf): Use simpler bitmap iteration, > touch work_set only when phi_insertion_points changed. > --- > gcc/cfganal.cc | 10 +++------- > 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/gcc/cfganal.cc b/gcc/cfganal.cc > index 432775decf1..5ef629f677e 100644 > --- a/gcc/cfganal.cc > +++ b/gcc/cfganal.cc > @@ -1701,8 +1701,7 @@ compute_idf (bitmap def_blocks, bitmap_head *dfs) > on earlier blocks first is better. > ??? Basic blocks are by no means guaranteed to be ordered in > optimal order for this iteration. */ > - bb_index = bitmap_first_set_bit (work_set); > - bitmap_clear_bit (work_set, bb_index); > + bb_index = bitmap_clear_first_set_bit (work_set); > > /* Since the registration of NEW -> OLD name mappings is done > separately from the call to update_ssa, when updating the SSA The above is clearly obvious. > @@ -1712,12 +1711,9 @@ compute_idf (bitmap def_blocks, bitmap_head *dfs) > gcc_checking_assert (bb_index > < (unsigned) last_basic_block_for_fn (cfun)); > > - EXECUTE_IF_AND_COMPL_IN_BITMAP (&dfs[bb_index], phi_insertion_points, > - 0, i, bi) > - { > + EXECUTE_IF_SET_IN_BITMAP (&dfs[bb_index], 0, i, bi) > + if (bitmap_set_bit (phi_insertion_points, i)) > bitmap_set_bit (work_set, i); > - bitmap_set_bit (phi_insertion_points, i); > - } > } I don't understand why the above is better. Wouldn't it be best to do bitmap_ior_and_compl_into (work_set, &dfs[bb_index], phi_insertion_points); bitmap_ior_into (phi_insertion_points, &dfs[bb_index]); ? Jakub