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: Inlining and estimate_num_insns


Steven Bosscher wrote:
On Saturday 26 February 2005 23:03, Jan Hubicka wrote:

Mark?  I would say that there is little risk in this patch corectness
wise, might have negative effect on compilation times since we re-start
inlining more like we did in old days.


Can we see some timings with and without this patch?

I'll do some tests with checking disabled once the builds are completed. Bootstrap times with checking enabled were not affected by the patch, so was PR8361. The tramp3d testcase showed a significant increase in compile time, but the 350% performance regression compared to 3.4 is fixed - in fact, we are now comparing apples-to-apples wrt compile times of 3.4 and 4.0 for this kind of code (comparisons with leafify show roughly the same compile time performance regression from 3.4 to 4.0). I'll post some more exact numbers for a checking disabled compiler later.

Richard.


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