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: Google SoC Project Proposal: Better Uninitialized Warnings

From: David Edelsohn <dje at watson dot ibm dot com>
To: Joe Buck <Joe dot Buck at synopsys dot COM>
Cc: Diego Novillo <dnovillo at redhat dot com>, Manuel López-Ibáñez <lopezibanez at gmail dot com>, GCC <gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org>, Ian Lance Taylor <iant at google dot com>, Jeffrey A Law <law at redhat dot com>
Date: Mon, 19 Mar 2007 15:32:19 -0400
Subject: Re: Google SoC Project Proposal: Better Uninitialized Warnings
References: <6c33472e0703171128q3dff544dydd6ab16fe4a67323@mail.gmail.com> <45FE8FBD.4030607@redhat.com> <20070319173354.GC5208@synopsys.com>

>>>>> Joe Buck writes:

Joe> What worries me is that we can't afford to make -O0 run significantly
Joe> slower than it does now.  Cycle speeds are no longer increasing, we have
Joe> to be very careful about slowing things down.

	Adding more passes does not necessarily slow down the compiler, as
IBM found with XLC.  If one can remove enough dead code / statements /
insns / IR, one performs more processing on less data leading to less
overall work and faster compilation at -O0.

David

Follow-Ups:
- Re: Google SoC Project Proposal: Better Uninitialized Warnings
  - From: Joe Buck

References:
- Google SoC Project Proposal: Better Uninitialized Warnings
  - From: Manuel López-Ibáñez
- Re: Google SoC Project Proposal: Better Uninitialized Warnings
  - From: Diego Novillo
- Re: Google SoC Project Proposal: Better Uninitialized Warnings
  - From: Joe Buck

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