This is the mail archive of the gcc@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: [ast-optimizer-branch] Simplification is pretty expensive

From: Diego Novillo <dnovillo at redhat dot com>
To: Jan Hubicka <jh at suse dot cz>
Cc: "gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org" <gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org>
Date: 04 Jun 2002 12:05:13 -0400
Subject: Re: [ast-optimizer-branch] Simplification is pretty expensive
References: <20020604151741.GH26038@tornado.toronto.redhat.com> <20020604155859.GM29372@atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz>

On Tue, 2002-06-04 at 11:58, Jan Hubicka wrote:

> Note that Andreas is already tracking the branch, so he has some history
> about the development, but since the simplification has been broken for
> a while, there is just huge gap in the results.
>
Yes.  The huge slowdown started when we finally fixed simplification.  
> > 
> > At least the SPEC scores don't seem to have been affected.  It's
> 
> For Andrea's testing they definitly are.  The scores seems to be
> consistently worse with -ftree-ssa
>
Odd.  -ftree-ssa didn't actually do *anything* until last week.


> Is this sutable to speedup (not slowdown) the non-optimizing compilation
> where we may want to skip simplification?
> 
Dunno.  We currently don't simplify at -O0.

Follow-Ups:
- Re: [ast-optimizer-branch] Simplification is pretty expensive
  - From: Jan Hubicka

References:
- [ast-optimizer-branch] Simplification is pretty expensive
  - From: Diego Novillo
- Re: [ast-optimizer-branch] Simplification is pretty expensive
  - From: Jan Hubicka

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