This is the mail archive of the
gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: New SAFE immediate use iterator
- From: "Richard Guenther" <richard dot guenther at gmail dot com>
- To: "Andrew MacLeod" <amacleod at redhat dot com>
- Cc: gcc-patches <gcc-patches at gcc dot gnu dot org>
- Date: Thu, 27 Apr 2006 10:09:17 +0200
- Subject: Re: New SAFE immediate use iterator
- References: <1146104830.23841.4.camel@pain>
On 4/27/06, Andrew MacLeod <amacleod@redhat.com> wrote:
>
> all.i from bug 26854:
> --------------------
> before patch:
> tree operand scan : 366.20 (31%) usr 2.59 (18%) sys 371.20 (31%) wall
> TOTAL :1177.57 14.10 1200.53
>
> after patch:
> tree operand scan : 3.07 ( 0%) usr 1.72 (12%) sys 4.69 ( 1%) wall
> TOTAL : 829.50 14.13 866.35
Yay! Nice.
> other effects were pretty minimal. FRE time went up a little, and PRE
> time went down a little in this testcase.
>
>
> bootstrapped and tested with no new regressions on i686-pc-linux-gnu.
>
> So the question is what to do with it. It should be fairly stable,
> removes potential future bugs, but it hasn't been super stress tested.
> Bug 26854 is a serious time regression, and it removes the number one
> time consumer down to virtually nothing. Thats a 4.1 bug though . I
> could check it into mainline and see if any problems surface within a
> few days. The conversion to a 4.1 patch is fairly trivial.
>
> I haven't been paying a lot of attention lately, last I heard we were in
> stage 2 for mainline... whats the scoop? Should I check this in?
We're in stage 3 if you look at our timeline, though probably more
like stage 2.5
as stage 3 has not been officially announced. As this is a compile-time
improvement and fixes a regression it is appropriate for the mainline (and if
it turns out safe, I think it should be applied to 4.1 as well, though
maybe queued
for 4.1.2, not 4.1.1, but that is Marks call).
Just my 2c,
Richard.