On Fri, Sep 25, 2020 at 3:32 PM Martin Liška <mli...@suse.cz> wrote: > > On 9/25/20 3:18 PM, Richard Biener wrote: > > On Fri, Sep 25, 2020 at 11:13 AM Martin Liška <mli...@suse.cz> wrote: > >> > >> Hello. > >> > >> All right, I come up with a rapid speed up that can allow us to remove > >> the introduced parameter. It contains 2 parts: > >> - BIT TEST: we allow at maximum a range that is smaller GET_MODE_BITSIZE > >> - JT: we spent quite some time in density calculation, we can guess it > >> first > >> and it leads to a fast bail out. > >> > >> Patch can bootstrap on x86_64-linux-gnu and survives regression tests. > >> > >> Ready to be installed? > > > > Err > > > > + auto_vec<int> dest_bbs; > > - auto_bitmap dest_bbs; > > > > - bitmap_set_bit (dest_bbs, sc->m_case_bb->index); > > + if (!dest_bbs.contains (sc->m_case_bb->index)) > > + { > > + dest_bbs.safe_push (sc->m_case_bb->index); > > + if (dest_bbs.length () > m_max_case_bit_tests) > > + return false; > > + } > > That's intentional as m_max_case_bit_tests is a very small number (3) and > I want to track *distinct* indices in dest_bbs. So dest_bbs.contains > is a constant operation.
You're storing bb->index and formerly set bb->index bit, what's the difference? For max 3 elements a vector is OK, of course but there should be a comment that says this ;) The static const is 'int' so it can in principle hold up to two billion ;) > > > > vec::contains is linear search so no. Was this for the length check? > > Just do > > > > if (bitmap_set_bit (...)) > > { > > length++; > > if (length > ...) > > I would need here bitmap_count_bits. Do you prefer it? bitmap_set_bit returns false if the bit was already set so you can count as you add bits, see the length++ above. For three elements the vec will be faster though. May I suggest to use auto_vec<int, m_max_case_bit_tests> dest_bbs; then and quick_push rather than safe_push (need to guard the push with the max_case_bit_test). Richard. > Martin > > > > >> Thanks, > >> Martin >