3.2 vs 3.1 speed

[Jan Hubicka]

> In message <200206051353.aa01413@gremlin-relay.ics.uci.edu>, Dan Nicolaescu wri
> tes:
>  > 
>  > One of the reasons that 3.2 is slower than 3.1 is that 3.2 just
>  > generates a lot more RTL (also see the huge increase in time spent in
>  > expand).
> Which is rather curious.  What would be even more interesting would be to know
> how much of that RTL is due to the RTL inliner and how much is due to the
> tree inliner.

Is the RTL inliner still used?  I don't think so.
There has been changes to the inlining heuristics, so I guess that will
explain the degradation.  Would be possible to know the full -fno-inline
comparisons?

Honza
> 
> jeff
>