[Bug ipa/65478] [5 regression] crafty performance regression

[hubicka at ucw dot cz]

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65478

--- Comment #7 from Jan Hubicka <hubicka at ucw dot cz> ---
> > We also may consider adding bit of negative hints for cases where
> > cloning would turn function called once (by noncold edge) to a
> > function called twice.
> 
> This would be much easier, although the penalty would have to be quite
> big because the goodness number calculated by
> good_cloning_opportunity_p is 830 and the threshold is 500.
> 
> But given the above, perhaps, for gcc 5 at least, we might want to
> introduce a 0.7 factor penalty for this and another 0.7 factor penalty
> just for being within an SCC?

Yep, that sounds like resonable thing to try to me.

Honza