This is the mail archive of the 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 to fix PR56999

On Fri, Apr 19, 2013 at 5:58 AM, Vladimir Makarov wrote:
>   The problem was in complicated interactions of coalescing and
> doing/undoing inheritance and assignment sub-passes through several
> iterations.  One solution would be in modifying coalescing in order to take
> future actions in undoing inheritance.  Another solution is to move coalesce
> pass after doing/undoing inheritance sub-passes.  The first solution
> complicates code and make passes more dependable although potentially
> decreasing # passes of creating live ranges.  The second solution makes
> coalescing pass simpler and less dependable.  After some experiments I've
> chosen the 2nd solution as it makes code more maintainable and less
> error-prone.  On my tests I found that in 32-bit mode it runs 10% more
> live-range passes (that is about 1/5th of LRA run time), in 64-bit mode the
> # passes are the same.  I check cpu and real time on 500K lines fortran code
> and did not find any visible increase in compilation time.

Does the flow chart at the top of lra.c also need updating for this?


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