This is the mail archive of the
gcc@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: LTO inlining of transactional builtins
>
> I'm not sure TM people care about double streaming cost ;) As far as I can
> see TM people want the non-lowered form go through at least loop optimizations,
> so I don't see how even a proper IPA pass would help here. As of cherry-picking
:) Yep, this is kind of similar to what we may want to do for datastructure changes etc.
Seems that loading selected functions into WPA stage and modifying them will end up
cheaper than double streaming, because this usually afects ust small portion of program.
But I am not sure. Double streaming is implementable, too.
Honza
> function bodies at late state, yes, that would be another missing feature to
> consider. But it would at least need the full WPA callgraph to be available,
> or in case of static libraries the linker plugin would need to feed even unused
> archive parts to WPA ... thus it would require some fake symtab entries we'd
> need to feed to the linker plugin. Quite some special case code in this case.
>
> Richard.
>
> > Honza
> >>
> >> Richard.
> >>
> >> >
> >>
> >> > r~