This is the mail archive of the gcc@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: SPARC code inefficiency

From: Jan Hubicka <jh at suse dot cz>
To: Dan Nicolaescu <dann at godzilla dot ICS dot UCI dot EDU>
Cc: Jan Hubicka <jh at suse dot cz>, gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org, law at redhat dot com
Date: Thu, 23 May 2002 09:11:01 +0200
Subject: Re: SPARC code inefficiency
References: <200205212313.aa02477@gremlin-relay.ics.uci.edu> <20020522084551.GA18955@atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz> <200205221009.aa27735@gremlin-relay.ics.uci.edu>

> 
> Is your webizer patch more likely to applied and enabled by default
> than the SSA code?

Well, SSA/deSSA has same effect as webizer.  I am not sure whether
webizer will be applied at all.  I will probably commit it for 3.2
inclusion as it looks unilikely that SSA path will be enabled in that
version.  I am not sure about usefullness of the patch (it is about 100
lines only) afterwards.  Still it may have effect as midRTL->lowlevel
RTL converison and other optimization (the webizer has been written
specially for tail duplication and loop unrolling pass) creates more
splitting oppurtunities.

Honza

References:
- SPARC code inefficiency
  - From: Dan Nicolaescu
- Re: SPARC code inefficiency
  - From: Jan Hubicka
- Re: SPARC code inefficiency
  - From: Dan Nicolaescu

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