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: [tree-ssa] POOMA compile time / memory requirement comparison


Mark Mitchell wrote:
I see two options here: (a) unfreeze the branch and do whatever work is
necessary to bring POOMA in line with mainline, (b) continue with the
merge and address these problems in mainline.

IMO option (a) is too costly and may only serve to delay tree-ssa even
more.  I suspect that much of the necessary work to reduce this gap
involves removing RTL passes and/or doing major surgery on trees, memory
allocation (the system times are pretty bad).



A compromise position would be to attempt to prove (by measuring) that eliminating the RTL passes would help. Can you quantify the time spent in the RTL passes that will hopefully soon be eliminated?

Using the suggested -fno-gcse -fno-cse-follow-jumps -fno-cse-skip-blocks -fno-web, -O2 compilation times improve about 8%. This leaves us with 10% to improve elsewhere (I guess, f.i. preserving the CFG could help, as well as removing some first invocations of CSE).


Richard.


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