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: combine/dce patch for PR36003, PR42575

From: Eric Botcazou <ebotcazou at adacore dot com>
To: Steven Bosscher <stevenb dot gcc at gmail dot com>
Cc: Bernd Schmidt <bernds at codesourcery dot com>, gcc-patches at gcc dot gnu dot org
Date: Thu, 24 Jun 2010 22:40:05 +0200
Subject: Re: combine/dce patch for PR36003, PR42575
References: <4C20938E.2060606@codesourcery.com> <201006241453.22378.ebotcazou@adacore.com> <AANLkTimQAYGG7EO7HAkEV7XcEsL0bJJrbtOfTbxWOI-8@mail.gmail.com>

> Byte DCE is also a separate pass, isn't it? The new pass would
> (should) just replace it. Byte DCE never really worked anyway, and
> *replacing* it with something simpler, instead of adding something
> new, would be a good thing IMHO.

Yes, but byte DCE isn't enabled so a new pass will slow down the compiler out 
of its mere existence, no matter how faster than byte DCE it is.

I'm not saying that adding a new pass is out of question, but rather that it 
should be the last resort solution.

-- 
Eric Botcazou

References:
- combine/dce patch for PR36003, PR42575
  - From: Bernd Schmidt
- Re: combine/dce patch for PR36003, PR42575
  - From: Eric Botcazou
- Re: combine/dce patch for PR36003, PR42575
  - From: Steven Bosscher

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