Compilation performance comparison of 3.5.0 and TreeSSA trees on MICO sources as requested in: [tree-ssa] Merge status 2004-05-03

[Steven Bosscher]

On May 05, 2004 12:10 AM, Diego Novillo <dnovillo@redhat.com> wrote:

> On Tue, 2004-05-04 at 16:50, Karel Gardas wrote:
> 
> > Conclusion: compile time regressions for both -O0 and -O2 compilation.

Thanks for all your timings.  Can you please time one more thing: What do thinks
look like for you with the following options:
"-O2 -fno-gcse -fno-delete-null-pointer-checks -fno-cse-follow-jumps"

> Thanks.  -O0 is a known loser right now.  The gimplification process
> tends to create extremely bloated RTL.  That can only be fixed by
> introducing simplistic tree optimization passes at O0.  I see this as a
> post-merge exercise, as well.

Some of this is already being worked on in the tree profiling branch (where
we have a tree CFG at -O0 on which we can do simple cleanups and such).

Gr.
Steven