https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103227
Bug 103227 depends on bug 92497, which changed state.
Bug 92497 Summary: Aggregate IPA-CP and inlining do not play well together,
transformation is lost
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92497
What|Removed
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103227
--- Comment #16 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Martin Jambor :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:4834e9360f7bf42fbeabaa20de5619e67c9fee4e
commit r13-4685-g4834e9360f7bf42fbeabaa20de5619e67c9fee4e
Author: Martin Jambor
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103227
Jan Hubicka changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|ASSIGNED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103227
--- Comment #14 from Jan Hubicka ---
Seems the performance is now better than before
https://lnt.opensuse.org/db_default/v4/SPEC/graph?highlight_run=21683=286.407.0
Still I think I should implement the logic to stabilize the order of nodes and
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103227
--- Comment #13 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Martin Jambor :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:5bc4cb04127a4805b6228b0a6cbfebdbd61314d2
commit r12-5527-g5bc4cb04127a4805b6228b0a6cbfebdbd61314d2
Author: Martin Jambor
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103227
--- Comment #12 from Martin Jambor ---
Some testing is still underway, but I have proposed the patch (with one minor
testsuite change) on the mailing list:
https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2021-November/585337.html
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103227
Martin Jambor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103227
--- Comment #10 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Jan Hubicka :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:0f5afb626381d19bfced30bc19cf3b03867fa6f5
commit r12-5439-g0f5afb626381d19bfced30bc19cf3b03867fa6f5
Author: Jan Hubicka
Date: Sun
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103227
--- Comment #9 from hubicka at kam dot mff.cuni.cz ---
> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103227
> ... fixing this problem properly.
> I just loked into thi again and we already have code that preserves
> propagates bits on pointer
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103227
--- Comment #8 from hubicka at kam dot mff.cuni.cz ---
> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103227
>
> --- Comment #7 from Martin Jambor ---
> (In reply to hubicka from comment #5)
> > > I like the idea of transformation phases
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103227
--- Comment #7 from Martin Jambor ---
(In reply to hubicka from comment #5)
> > I like the idea of transformation phases better than putting
> > everything into tree-inline (and by extension ipa-param-manipulation)
> > but perhaps we have to do
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103227
--- Comment #6 from Jan Hubicka ---
struct a{int a,b;};
int bar (struct a *a)
{
if (!a->a)
__builtin_abort ();
}
static
__attribute__ ((noinline))
int foo (struct a a)
{
struct a b = a;
bar ();
return b.a+b.b;
}
int
test()
{
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103227
--- Comment #5 from hubicka at kam dot mff.cuni.cz ---
> I like the idea of transformation phases better than putting
> everything into tree-inline (and by extension ipa-param-manipulation)
> but perhaps we have to do aggregate constant
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103227
--- Comment #4 from Martin Jambor ---
Still, the interaction between IPA-CP and IPA-SRA is bad here. Just
looking at the optimized dump, one of the "specialized functions"
starts with:
[local count: 62767467]:
# DEBUG D#203 s=> row
#
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103227
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||missed-optimization
Target
15 matches
Mail list logo
