Re: LNO Branch merge proposal

[Jan Hubicka <hubicka at ucw dot cz>]

> In message <200403171923.i2HJN9T35164@makai.watson.ibm.com>, David Edelsohn wri
> tes:
>  >	The developers of the LNO Branch, with support from Apple
>  >Computer, Inc., IBM Corporation, and SUSE, plan to contribute the branch
>  >for merger into mainline shortly after Tree-SSA is merged into mainline.
>  >We suggest one to three weeks after Tree-SSA is merged to allow for settling
>  >of that merge.
> I think it's way too soon to consider doing this.   I don't even think 
> anyone with global write privs is even working with that code right now.
> 
> Contrast that to the tree-ssa branch where Richard, Jason, and myself are
> all actively developing code.

Some guideline on how branch merging in post-ssa world will be organized
would be usefull tought.  The tree-profiling branch now have CFG
transparent optimizations all from tree build_cfg to final with the
single expection of old loop optimizer (currently disabled now).
It also has working coverage support and profile available to tree
optimizers.

After fixing funny bug causing every conditional to be output twice it
_seems_ to be 5% faster than tree-ssa (I find it very hard to believe
but it is what tester claims), code seems to be 1% slower for reason I
don't understand (it is not disabled loop) too, so I need to look into
it deeper before claiming something.

We still have some way to go before getting profile based inlining but
it would be nice to have some roadmap synchronized with mainline.

Honza