This is the mail archive of the
gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: [PATCH][RFC] Make expansion of balanced binary trees of switches on tree level.
- From: David Malcolm <dmalcolm at redhat dot com>
- To: Martin Liška <mliska at suse dot cz>, gcc-patches at gcc dot gnu dot org
- Cc: Jan Hubicka <hubicka at ucw dot cz>, Martin Jambor <mjambor at suse dot cz>
- Date: Wed, 02 Aug 2017 09:38:48 -0400
- Subject: Re: [PATCH][RFC] Make expansion of balanced binary trees of switches on tree level.
- Authentication-results: sourceware.org; auth=none
- Authentication-results: ext-mx09.extmail.prod.ext.phx2.redhat.com; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=redhat.com
- Authentication-results: ext-mx09.extmail.prod.ext.phx2.redhat.com; spf=fail smtp.mailfrom=dmalcolm at redhat dot com
- Dmarc-filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mx1.redhat.com 962C44E047
- References: <b9bed4ff-cbb3-4d33-f54f-0f5a45b421e9@suse.cz>
On Wed, 2017-08-02 at 13:20 +0200, Martin Liška wrote:
> Hello.
>
> After some discussions with Honza, I've decided to convert current
> code in stmt.c that
> is responsible for switch expansion. More precisely, I would like to
> convert the code
> to expand gswitch statements on tree level. Currently the newly
> created pass is executed
> at the end of tree optimizations.
>
> My plan for future is to inspire in [1] and come up with some more
> sophisticated switch
> expansions. For that I've been working on a paper where I'll
> summarize statistics based
> on what I've collected in openSUSE distribution with specially
> instrumented GCC. If I'll be
> happy I can also fit in to schedule of this year's Cauldron with a
> talk.
>
> Patch can bootstrap on ppc64le-redhat-linux and survives regression
> tests.
>
> Thoughts?
> Martin
>
> [1] https://www.nextmovesoftware.com/technology/SwitchOptimization.pd
> f
>
> gcc/ChangeLog:
>
> 2017-07-31 Martin Liska <mliska@suse.cz>
>
[...]
> * gimple-switch-low.c: New file.
Shouldn't new files have a .cc suffix these days?
[...]