From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <gcc-return-54857-listarch-gcc=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org>
Received: (qmail 552 invoked by alias); 11 Jun 2002 14:47:34 -0000
Mailing-List: contact gcc-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Archive: <http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc/>
List-Post: <mailto:gcc@gcc.gnu.org>
List-Help: <http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/>
Sender: gcc-owner@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 482 invoked from network); 11 Jun 2002 14:47:32 -0000
Received: from unknown (HELO touchme.toronto.redhat.com) (216.138.202.10)
  by sources.redhat.com with SMTP; 11 Jun 2002 14:47:32 -0000
Received: from localhost (unknown [172.16.14.228])
	by touchme.toronto.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP
	id 7698BB883E; Tue, 11 Jun 2002 10:47:31 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: Re: [RFC] Extension of SIMPLE for Fortran 95
From: Diego Novillo <dnovillo@redhat.com>
To: Jan Hubicka <jh@suse.cz>
Cc: Richard Henderson <rth@redhat.com>,
	Tim Prince <tprince@computer.org>,
	"S. Bosscher" <S.Bosscher@student.tudelft.nl>,
	"'gcc@gcc.gnu.org'" <gcc@gcc.gnu.org>
In-Reply-To: <20020611135021.GD958@atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz>
References: <4195D82C2DB1D211B9910008C7C9B06F01F37285@lr0nt3.lr.tudelft.nl>
	<20020611032538.C2D982CDD3@inet1.ywave.com>
	<20020610211054.A1050@redhat.com>
	<20020611103835.GG30036@atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz>
	<1023800221.1209.0.camel@shadowfax> 
	<20020611135021.GD958@atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz>
Content-Type: text/plain
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Date: Tue, 11 Jun 2002 07:53:00 -0000
Message-Id: <1023806852.1185.5.camel@shadowfax>
Mime-Version: 1.0
X-SW-Source: 2002-06/txt/msg00722.txt.bz2

On Tue, 2002-06-11 at 09:50, Jan Hubicka wrote:

> What are the consequences on code size/perfomrance of enabling these
> bits?  I am always running into performance problems when I implement
> some idea of reugualizing CFG on RTL level...
> 
Dunno.  I haven't done any testing on these passes.  Sebastian mentioned
code growth, but I don't know of any systematic testing.

Diego.