This is the mail archive of the gcc-patches@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] |
3- The easiest approach will probably be comparing statement lists versus gimple sequences. We still haven't gone through making sure we release all the expression trees that are gimplified.
Yes, I'm noticing benchmarking is going to be non-trivial, and probably not an exact science until we have exact code paths, and we can benchmark right before RTL generation, not after gimplification like I will be forced to do now.
I think comparing statement lists versus gimple sequences will be the most straightforward way. Of course I will have to adjust the size of tuples for extra things we have in there, like USE/DEF information, BB information, etc.
Here you're just counting the size of the pointer. You need to call tree_code_size for each operand added.@@ -186,9 +212,14 @@ gimple_alloc (enum gimple_code code) static void gimple_alloc_ops (gimple stmt, size_t num_ops) { - stmt->with_ops.op = ggc_alloc_cleared (sizeof (tree) * num_ops); + unsigned int size = sizeof (tree) * num_ops;
Are you sure? It looks like the tree counterpart is only adding pointers for operands. See tree_code_size:
Index Nav: | [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index] | |
---|---|---|
Message Nav: | [Date Prev] [Date Next] | [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] |