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: [PATCH GCC]Relax the probability condition in CE pass when optimizing for code size



> -----Original Message-----
> From: gcc-patches-owner@gcc.gnu.org [mailto:gcc-patches-owner@gcc.gnu.org]
On
> Behalf Of Bin Cheng
> Sent: Tuesday, March 26, 2013 4:33 PM
> To: 'Joern Rennecke'
> Cc: gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org; 'Jeff Law'
> Subject: RE: [PATCH GCC]Relax the probability condition in CE pass when
> optimizing for code size
> 
> 
> 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Joern Rennecke [mailto:joern.rennecke@embecosm.com]
> > Sent: Monday, March 25, 2013 8:53 PM
> > To: Bin Cheng
> > Cc: gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
> > Subject: Re: [PATCH GCC]Relax the probability condition in CE pass
> > when optimizing for code size
> >
> > Quoting Bin Cheng <bin.cheng@arm.com>:
> >
> > > During the work I observed passes before combine might interfere
> > > with CE pass, so this patch is enabled for ce2/ce3 after combination
pass.
> > >
> > > It is tested on x86/thumb2 for both normal and Os. Is it ok for trunk?
> >
> > There are bound to be target and application specific variations on
> > which scaling factors work best.
> >
> > > 2013-03-25  Bin Cheng  <bin.cheng@arm.com>
> > >
> > > 	* ifcvt.c (ifcvt_after_combine): New static variable.
> >
> > It would make more sense to pass in the scale factor as a an argument
> > to if_convert.  And get the respective values from a set of gcc
> > parameters,
> so
> > they can be tweaked by ports and/or by a user/ML learning framework
(e.g.
> > Milepost) supplying the appropriate --param option.
> 
> I agree it would be more flexible to pass the factor as parameter, but not
> sure how useful to users it will be because: firstly it has already been
> target specific by the BRANCH_COST heuristic; for code size, the heuristic
> should be tuned to achieve an overall good results, I doubt to which
extend it
> depends on specific target/application.
> 
> Hi Jeff,
> This is based on your heuristic tuning in ifcvt, would you help us on this
> issue with some suggestions?

Ping.




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