This is the mail archive of the gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org mailing list for the GCC project.

Index Nav:	[Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav:	[Date Prev] [Date Next]	[Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
Other format:	[Raw text]

Re: Avoid majority of init_emit calls

From: Jan Hubicka <jh at suse dot cz>
To: Jan Hubicka <jh at suse dot cz>
Cc: Richard Henderson <rth at redhat dot com>, gcc-patches at gcc dot gnu dot org
Date: Thu, 22 Jan 2004 12:56:44 +0100
Subject: Re: Avoid majority of init_emit calls
References: <20040121210002.GP31813@kam.mff.cuni.cz> <20040121210705.GA2837@nevyn.them.org> <20040121213141.GA17674@kam.mff.cuni.cz> <20040122072657.GA18108@redhat.com> <20040122115450.GI31813@kam.mff.cuni.cz>

> > On Wed, Jan 21, 2004 at 10:31:41PM +0100, Jan Hubicka wrote:
> > > They probably made sense when we did statement-at-a-time, but we don't
> > > for a while.  But perhaps I am mistaken?
> > 
> > No, you're right.  Patch approved, mainline and branch.
> 
> Thanks!
> Looking at the profiles in my branch, the function.c again climbed up to
> my 10 hottest memory allocators radar:
> function.c:6384 (allocate_struct_function)    9158 4688896    1978128:2.021%
> Do we really need to maintain the structu_function all the time from
> allocation up to (unlikely) event that it will get parsed?
^^ I meant parsing here :)

Honza
> 
> Honza
>

References:
- Avoid majority of init_emit calls
  - From: Jan Hubicka
- Re: Avoid majority of init_emit calls
  - From: Daniel Jacobowitz
- Re: Avoid majority of init_emit calls
  - From: Jan Hubicka
- Re: Avoid majority of init_emit calls
  - From: Richard Henderson
- Re: Avoid majority of init_emit calls
  - From: Jan Hubicka

Index Nav:	[Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav:	[Date Prev] [Date Next]	[Thread Prev] [Thread Next]