This is the mail archive of the
gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: Tree inlining for the C front end (part 3 of 3)
- To: Daniel Berlin <dan at cgsoftware dot com>
- Subject: Re: Tree inlining for the C front end (part 3 of 3)
- From: Alexandre Oliva <aoliva at redhat dot com>
- Date: 25 Sep 2001 10:15:38 -0300
- Cc: Gerald Pfeifer <pfeifer at dbai dot tuwien dot ac dot at>, <gcc-patches at gcc dot gnu dot org>
- Organization: GCC Team, Red Hat
- References: <6C59D124-B1AC-11D5-9D8F-0030657B5340@cgsoftware.com>
On Sep 25, 2001, Daniel Berlin <dan@cgsoftware.com> wrote:
> Not doing performance testing on patches specifically meant to improve
> performance (Otherwise, why the heck are we doing tree inlining at
> all?)
See the message I've just posted.
> Had performance testing been done, it would have been noticed that it
> made 0% difference.
I guess performance testing was done at the time store motion was
implemented. I suspect it ended up broken because of countless
merges, possibly with errors, before it was contributed. This is
exactly what I'm trying to avoid by contributing this chunk of code as
early as possible.
--
Alexandre Oliva Enjoy Guarana', see http://www.ic.unicamp.br/~oliva/
Red Hat GCC Developer aoliva@{cygnus.com, redhat.com}
CS PhD student at IC-Unicamp oliva@{lsd.ic.unicamp.br, gnu.org}
Free Software Evangelist *Please* write to mailing lists, not to me