This is the mail archive of the gcc-patches@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: CFG transparent inlining

From: Andrew Haley <aph at redhat dot com>
To: Daniel Berlin <dberlin at dberlin dot org>
Cc: Jan Hubicka <jh at suse dot cz>, gcc-patches at gcc dot gnu dot org, rth at redhat dot com
Date: Fri, 29 Apr 2005 14:57:59 +0100
Subject: Re: CFG transparent inlining
References: <20050429134201.GM29212@kam.mff.cuni.cz><17010.15155.486545.372428@cuddles.cambridge.redhat.com><1114782733.6623.3.camel@linux.site>

Daniel Berlin writes:
 > On Fri, 2005-04-29 at 14:48 +0100, Andrew Haley wrote:
 > > Jan Hubicka writes:
 > >  > 
 > >  > 
 > >  > Bootstrapped/regtested i686-pc-gnu-linux,x86-64-linux,ppc-linux and ia64-linux
 > >  > (last two only in earlier incarnation of patch before resolving some further
 > >  > conflicts on moving mainline)
 > > 
 > > Tested with large code bases? 
 > 
 > SPEC, all of int and FP.

I can't remember what is in SPEC.  Has libc been tested, or the kernel?

 > > Java tested at all?
 > 
 > I've bootstrapped java on powerpc-linux and i686-pc-linux with the
 > tree-profiling branch, which has this on it.

At least it's a basic smoke test, since the testsuite is compiled at
-O3.  That'll probably be enough for mainline.

Andrew.

Follow-Ups:
- Re: CFG transparent inlining
  - From: Daniel Berlin

References:
- CFG transparent inlining
  - From: Jan Hubicka
- Re: CFG transparent inlining
  - From: Andrew Haley
- Re: CFG transparent inlining
  - From: Daniel Berlin

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