This is the mail archive of the
gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
[Bug tree-optimization/18704] [4.0 Regression] Inlining limits cause 340% performance regression
- From: "rguenth at tat dot physik dot uni-tuebingen dot de" <gcc-bugzilla at gcc dot gnu dot org>
- To: gcc-bugs at gcc dot gnu dot org
- Date: 6 Dec 2004 12:33:25 -0000
- Subject: [Bug tree-optimization/18704] [4.0 Regression] Inlining limits cause 340% performance regression
- References: <20041128181553.18704.rguenth@tat.physik.uni-tuebingen.de>
- Reply-to: gcc-bugzilla at gcc dot gnu dot org
------- Additional Comments From rguenth at tat dot physik dot uni-tuebingen dot de 2004-12-06 12:33 -------
Subject: Re: [4.0 Regression] Inlining limits
cause 340% performance regression
On 6 Dec 2004, pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org wrote:
> No reason to keep this one open, there is PR 17863 still.
> Also note I heard from Honza that the tree
> profiling branch with feedback can optimizate better than with your
> leafy patch.
I tried tree-profiling branch and profile-based inlining is actually
worse than "normal" inlining with inline-unit-growth=150. Worse by
a factor of four. So, no cigar yet.
And btw. profile based inlining seems to be ignorant of inline-unit-growth
(at least it doesnt improve for greater values).
And generating the profile is _very_ slow (for the tramp3d testcase).
Runtime increases about 100 fold - not very good for creating a meaningful
profile.
Richard.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=18704