Sat Sep 20 18:29:00 GMT 2014
> Yep, tree_to_shwi will check it. The old code did generic expression folding and
> called tree_to_shwi on result, so the only difference is that old code will accept
> unfolded expressions that miraculously folds into constant. I think it is bug to
> have those in IL especially on places we do not expect variable offsets.
> Based on that observation, I think we can also drop handling of PLUS_EXPR in this case
> as follows.
> Concerning the function, it has documented in toplevel comment that parameter must
> be constant or it crashes, so I think it is fine. Conerning name, I am open for renaming,
> but we have those int_* variants in quite few copies, so I can do that incrementally
> (see int_byte_position and related functions in stor layout).
> I am testing the following simplified (and inline) variant.
> Perhaps we could do similar stuff for other int_* accessors even if they do not
> sit on hot paths in my test, just for the sake of code size.
Note that I benchmarked libxul build. This patch makes devirtualization to go from
70% of compile time to 30%, so it is about twice as fast.
I will care the rest by caching reorg (it went up from 4% to 70% by introducing the
More information about the Gcc-patches