[Bug optimization/10679] [3.3/3.4] --param min-inline-insns not honoured

["rguenth at tat dot physik dot uni-tuebingen dot de" <gcc-bugzilla at gcc dot gnu dot org>]

PLEASE REPLY TO gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org ONLY, *NOT* gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org.

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=10679



------- Additional Comments From rguenth@tat.physik.uni-tuebingen.de  2003-06-04 21:54 -------
Subject: Re:  [3.3/3.4] --param min-inline-insns not
 honoured

On 4 Jun 2003, dhazeghi@yahoo.com wrote:

> PLEASE REPLY TO gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org ONLY, *NOT* gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org.
>
> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=10679
>
>
>
> ------- Additional Comments From dhazeghi@yahoo.com  2003-06-04 21:44 -------
> Darn! I should have read the thread more carefully, sorry for the noise... Do you think it would be
> worthwhile to submit a generic PR stating that the inliner is broken, period, and set it to P1,
> blocker for 3.4? It seems rather ridiculous to be planning yet another release without this IMHO
> extremely serious problem being solved. I really don't think waiting for tree-ssa is a valid option...

Yes, but everyone seems to set their bets on tree-ssa to make inlining
"trivially" work. But with this PR fixed, and __attribute__((leafify)) I'm
currently happy (apart from far from ideal CSE/GCSE/loop on the resulting
large functions).

Richard.





------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is.