From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 6607 invoked by alias); 23 Apr 2003 15:46:10 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gcc-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: Sender: gcc-owner@gcc.gnu.org Received: (qmail 6518 invoked from network); 23 Apr 2003 15:46:09 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO doubledemon.codesourcery.com) (66.60.148.227) by sources.redhat.com with SMTP; 23 Apr 2003 15:46:09 -0000 Received: from doubledemon.codesourcery.com (doubledemon.codesourcery.com [127.0.0.1]) by doubledemon.codesourcery.com (8.12.8/8.12.8) with ESMTP id h3NFk79X031400; Wed, 23 Apr 2003 08:46:07 -0700 Subject: Re: PR 10196 / Re: Inliner parameters From: Mark Mitchell To: Richard Guenther Cc: Steven Bosscher , gcc@gcc.gnu.org In-Reply-To: References: Content-Type: text/plain Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Date: Wed, 23 Apr 2003 17:21:00 -0000 Message-Id: <1051112768.31145.35.camel@doubledemon.codesourcery.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-SW-Source: 2003-04/txt/msg01156.txt.bz2 On Wed, 2003-04-23 at 05:06, Richard Guenther wrote: > On 23 Apr 2003, Steven Bosscher wrote: > > > Op wo 23-04-2003, om 13:36 schreef Richard Guenther: > > > > > > which is _a lot_ better, but still a 19% regression for -fno-exceptions > > > and a 22% regression for -fexceptions. But as these numbers are below > > > 30%, we can now downgrade the priority of the PR? > > > > Part of that 30% can probably be explained with PR 8361, but inlining > > still is slower, and there should be a PR for that, I think. > > > > So I propose we close PR 10316, and we either close 10196 and open a new > > PR for the inliner slowdown, or we leave 10196 open with a remark in the > > audit trail. Does that sound OK to you? > > I assumed the inliner slowdown was resolved by marks first patch (a month > ago), and now the EH problem was solved. I propose to close the PR, as the > audit trail is already quite huge. I'll check the EH/inliner problems > seperately again and open two PRs tracking them separately, if necessary. I think the submitter always has the right to close a PR they submitted. It's all about customer satisfaction. :-) I've closed PR 10196; if there are more you want to open, go ahead. :-) -- Mark Mitchell CodeSourcery, LLC mark@codesourcery.com