This is the mail archive of the
gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: [wwwdocs] Update gcc-8/changes.html for some IPA and x86 canges
- From: Gerald Pfeifer <gerald at pfeifer dot com>
- To: Jan Hubicka <hubicka at ucw dot cz>
- Cc: gcc-patches at gcc dot gnu dot org, rguenther at suse dot de
- Date: Mon, 19 Mar 2018 23:48:54 +0100 (CET)
- Subject: Re: [wwwdocs] Update gcc-8/changes.html for some IPA and x86 canges
- References: <20180319210851.GA61820@kam.mff.cuni.cz>
Hi Honza,
thanks for putting this together. Below you'll find a number of
simple suggestions. This patch is fine if you make those changes;
no need to review again, though posting the final patch would be
good.
On Mon, 19 Mar 2018, Jan Hubicka wrote:
> + <li>Reworked runtime estimation metrics leading to more realistic guesses
> + driving inliner and clonning heuristics.</li>
"run-time" (since it's an adjective here)
"cloning"
> + <li>The ipa-pure-const pass is extended to propagate malloc attribute, and the
"the <code>malloc</code> attribute", i.e., add "the" and markup.
> + corresponding warning option <code>Wsuggest-attribute=malloc</code> emits a
> + diagnostic for a function, which can be annotated with malloc attribute.</li>
"with the <code>malloc</code>"
> + <li>New infrastructure for representing profile (both statically guessed
> + and profile feedback) which allows propagation of furhter information
> + about reliablility of the profile.</li>
"representing profiles"?
"further" (typo)
"about the reliability"
> + <li>Number of improvements in profile updating code solving problems
> + found by new verification code.</li>
"A number of..."
"in the profile updating code"
"> + <li>Static detection of code which is not executed in valid run of the
"in a valid run"
> + program. This includes paths which triggers undefined behaviour
"trigger" (plural)
And "behavior" (American English)
> + as well as call to functions declared with <code>cold</code> attribute.
"calls" (plural)
"declared with the" (add article)
> + Newly <code>noreturn</code> attribute does not imply all effects of
> + <code>cold</code> to make difference between <code>exit</code> (which
> + is <code>noreturn/code> and <code>abort</code> (which is in addition
> + not executed in valid runs).</li>
"The new...attribute", or did you mean "Newly the ...attribute"?
"to make a difference" or better "differentiate"?
And closing ")" in the description of exit.
> + <li>
> + Vectorization costs metrics has been reworked leading to significant improvments
> + on some benchmarks</li>
"cost metrics"
And "." at the very end.
Cheers,
Gerald