From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 8418 invoked by alias); 5 Oct 2009 14:42:15 -0000 Received: (qmail 8394 invoked by uid 22791); 5 Oct 2009 14:42:13 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-2.3 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,SPF_HELO_PASS,SPF_PASS X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from mx1.redhat.com (HELO mx1.redhat.com) (209.132.183.28) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Mon, 05 Oct 2009 14:42:08 +0000 Received: from int-mx03.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (int-mx03.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.16]) by mx1.redhat.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id n95Eg6s3008414; Mon, 5 Oct 2009 10:42:06 -0400 Received: from fche.csb (vpn-240-19.phx2.redhat.com [10.3.240.19]) by int-mx03.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id n95Eg57S001796; Mon, 5 Oct 2009 10:42:05 -0400 Received: by fche.csb (Postfix, from userid 2569) id 4AB0058115; Mon, 5 Oct 2009 10:42:05 -0400 (EDT) To: Diego Novillo Cc: gcc@gcc.gnu.org, fortran@gcc.gnu.org, java@gcc.gnu.org Subject: Re: LTO branch merged into trunk - trunk remains CLOSED References: <20091003211217.GA22755@google.com> From: fche@redhat.com (Frank Ch. Eigler) Date: Mon, 05 Oct 2009 14:42:00 -0000 In-Reply-To: <20091003211217.GA22755@google.com> (Diego Novillo's message of "Sat, 3 Oct 2009 17:12:17 -0400") Message-ID: User-Agent: Gnus/5.1008 (Gnus v5.10.8) Emacs/21.4 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Mailing-List: contact java-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: java-owner@gcc.gnu.org X-SW-Source: 2009-10/txt/msg00029.txt.bz2 Diego Novillo writes: > The LTO branch has been merged into trunk at revision 152434. > [...] Congrats. > [...] That's it. The result should, in principle, execute faster > but our IPA cost models are still not tweaked for LTO. We've seen > speedups as well as slowdowns in benchmarks (see the LTO testers at > http://gcc.opensuse.org/). [...] Would it make sense to keep -flto unemphasized in NEWS etc., until some consistently positive performance results of some sort have been identified? - FChE