Memory footprint/compile time explosion caused by the tree inliner

[Joe Buck]

> > According to Vlad, there is no hope, the scheduler is at least O(n^2).

On Fri, Apr 18, 2003 at 10:49:51AM -0400, Geert Bosch wrote:
> Why can't we just insert arbitrary scheduling barriers in very large
> functions and schedule the pieces independently? We could relate the
> maximum size of a piece to expected execution frequency, so that we
> work harder to optimize loops than other code.

We pretty much have to do something like that; there are a lot of
processor simulator codes that have huge functions that are essentially a
straight line.  Toon, you're the expert, but I understand that this is
really common in scientific Fortran codes.

> Think about it, wouldn't it be quite unacceptable if the scheduling
> performed by out-of-order processors would be anything else than
> linear in the number of instructions of the executed code? :-)

Yes, it would be unacceptable.  Quadratic up to some function size cutoff
and linear after that would be OK.