On Wed, Nov 29, 2017 at 08:46:41PM -0700, Martin Sebor wrote: > On 11/29/2017 04:13 PM, Segher Boessenkool wrote: > >This improves the assembler output (for -dp and -fverbose-asm) in > >several ways. It always prints the insn_cost. It does not print > >"[length = NN]" but "[c=NN l=NN]", to save space. It does not add one > >to the instruction alternative number (everything else starts counting > >those at 0, too). And finally, it tries to keep things lined up in > >columns a bit better. > > > >Tested on powerpc64-linux {-m32,-m64}; is this okay for trunk? > > [c=NN l=NN] will be meaningless to those without some deeper > insight into/experience with what's actually being printed. > It might as well say [NN NN]. But such extreme terseness would
Length isn't printed on all targets, fwiw. > seem to run counter to the documented purpose of -fverbose-asm > to "Put extra commentary information in the generated assembly > code to make it more readable." The point is that [length = 12] takes up an awful lot of space. The output of -fverbose-asm alread suffers from information overload. > Looking further in the manual I don't see the [length=NN] bit > mentioned (nor does your patch add a mention of it) so while > the meaning of [length=NN] isn't exactly obvious, using [l=NN] > instead certainly won't make it easier to read. Does the manual > need updating? Should -fverbose-asm print length (and cost) at all? They should be printed for -dp (which is for debugging the *compiler*), but are they very useful for -fverbose-asm (which is primarily for debugging the *user program*)? Segher