On 09/20/2017 05:00 PM, Jeff Law wrote: > On 09/20/2017 01:24 AM, Martin Liška wrote: > >> >> Hello. >> >> Thank you Jeff for very verbose explanation what's happening. I'm planning >> to do >> follow-up of this patch that will include clustering for bit-tests and jump >> tables. >> Maybe that will make aforementioned issues even more difficult, but we'll >> see. > FWIW, the DOM changes to simplify the conditionals seem to help both > cases, trigger reasonably consistently in a bootstrap and for some > subset of the triggers actually result in transformations that allow > other passes to do a better job in the common (-O2) case. So my > inclination is to polish them a bit further get them on the trunk. > > My recommendation is to ignore the two regressions for now and focus on > the cleanups you're trying to do. > > jeff >
Hello. Some time ago I've decided that I'll make patch submission of switch clustering in next stage1. However, this patch can be applied as is in this stage3. Would it be possible or is it too late? Thanks, Martin
