This is the mail archive of the
gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: [Ping]Two pending IVOPT patches
- From: Jeff Law <law at redhat dot com>
- To: "bin.cheng" <bin dot cheng at arm dot com>, "Bin.Cheng" <amker dot cheng at gmail dot com>
- Cc: gcc-patches List <gcc-patches at gcc dot gnu dot org>, Richard Biener <richard dot guenther at gmail dot com>, Zdenek Dvorak <rakdver at iuuk dot mff dot cuni dot cz>
- Date: Tue, 10 Dec 2013 13:18:30 -0700
- Subject: Re: [Ping]Two pending IVOPT patches
- Authentication-results: sourceware.org; auth=none
- References: <CAHFci2_xWTGDTJQDffS7uSsr8+yYzmQHZwKpw90Fwrk12Awt9Q at mail dot gmail dot com> <5293C9CC dot 9010406 at redhat dot com> <CAHFci2_btO+EXF1Kd7eU8ifFiSJaN=8SiHgfpQs-FF-oQfUMxw at mail dot gmail dot com> <52A644A4 dot 9090204 at redhat dot com> <000d01cef575$b8d1a990$2a74fcb0$ at arm dot com>
On 12/10/13 00:01, bin.cheng wrote:
Emm, some kind of. See the cost of iv candidate set consists of several
parts, the representation cost in cost pair; the register pressure cost
falls in dependence on invariant expressions, etc.. Here iv_ca_has_deps
checks whether new cost pair depends on other invariant expression which is
not involved before, if so, current algorithm considers the new cost pair
has higher cost and just skips. In fact, the new cost pair may give us
lower overall cost even it introduces new dependence(similar to the case I
gave). That's why I used the overall cost comparison for good.
OK. Thanks for the explanation.
Is this new version patch looks good to you? I will re-test if it's ok.
It does. Please do some final testing and it should be good to go.
jeff