https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102943
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|NEW
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102943
--- Comment #51 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Andrew Macleod :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:8db155ddf8cec9e31f0a4b8d80cc67db2c7a26f9
commit r12-7692-g8db155ddf8cec9e31f0a4b8d80cc67db2c7a26f9
Author: Andrew MacLeod
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102943
--- Comment #50 from hubicka at kam dot mff.cuni.cz ---
> It helps quite a bit, the worst case is now
>
> tree VRP : 5.14 ( 7%) 0.02 ( 3%) 5.15 (
> 7%)
>2
> 9M ( 3%)
> backwards jump threading
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102943
--- Comment #49 from Andrew Macleod ---
Let me clean it up a little and I'll post it.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102943
--- Comment #48 from Richard Biener ---
(In reply to Andrew Macleod from comment #47)
> Created attachment 52637 [details]
> new patch
>
> I am working on a alternative cache for GCC 13, but along the way, I have
> changes to the ranger_cache::
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102943
--- Comment #47 from Andrew Macleod ---
Created attachment 52637
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=52637&action=edit
new patch
I am working on a alternative cache for GCC 13, but along the way, I have
changes to the ranger_ca
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102943
--- Comment #46 from Andrew Macleod ---
(In reply to Richard Biener from comment #44)
> (In reply to Richard Biener from comment #43)
> > (In reply to Andrew Macleod from comment #42)
> > > (In reply to Richard Biener from comment #37)
> > > > I
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102943
--- Comment #45 from Andrew Macleod ---
(In reply to Richard Biener from comment #43)
> (In reply to Andrew Macleod from comment #42)
> > (In reply to Richard Biener from comment #37)
> > > I'm looking at range_def_chain::m_def_chain, it's use i
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102943
--- Comment #44 from Richard Biener ---
(In reply to Richard Biener from comment #43)
> (In reply to Andrew Macleod from comment #42)
> > (In reply to Richard Biener from comment #37)
> > > I'm looking at range_def_chain::m_def_chain, it's use i
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102943
--- Comment #43 from Richard Biener ---
(In reply to Andrew Macleod from comment #42)
> (In reply to Richard Biener from comment #37)
> > I'm looking at range_def_chain::m_def_chain, it's use is well obfuscated by
> > inheritance but comments su
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102943
--- Comment #42 from Andrew Macleod ---
(In reply to Richard Biener from comment #37)
> I'm looking at range_def_chain::m_def_chain, it's use is well obfuscated by
> inheritance but comments suggest that we have one such structure either for
> e
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102943
--- Comment #41 from Andrew Macleod ---
>
> so it's still by far jump-threading/VRP dominating compile-times (I wonder
> if we should separate "old" and "new" [E]VRP timevars). Given that VRP
> shows up as well it's more likely the underlying
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102943
--- Comment #40 from Richard Biener ---
OK, so after the two micro-optimizations we are now at
tree VRP : 10.92 ( 17%) 0.03 ( 5%) 10.94 ( 17%)
28M ( 4%)
backwards jump threading : 11.16 ( 18%) 0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102943
--- Comment #39 from Richard Biener ---
For the second largest LTRANS unit we also have
tree SSA incremental : 10.89 ( 10%) 0.02 ( 3%) 10.74 ( 10%)
5030k ( 1%)
tree loop unswitching : 1.39 ( 1%) 0.00 (
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102943
--- Comment #38 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Richard Biener :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:ee34ffa429a399f292ad1421333721a92b998772
commit r12-7592-gee34ffa429a399f292ad1421333721a92b998772
Author: Richard Biener
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102943
--- Comment #37 from Richard Biener ---
I'm looking at range_def_chain::m_def_chain, it's use is well obfuscated by
inheritance but comments suggest that we have one such structure either for
each edge in the CFG or for each basic-block. In par
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102943
--- Comment #36 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Richard Biener :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:83bc478d3ba6a40fe3cec72dc9057ceca4dc9137
commit r12-7590-g83bc478d3ba6a40fe3cec72dc9057ceca4dc9137
Author: Richard Biener
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102943
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed|2022-01-18 00:00:00 |2022-3-10
--- Comment #35 from Richard
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102943
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed|2021-10-26 00:00:00 |2022-1-18
--- Comment #34 from Richard
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102943
--- Comment #33 from hubicka at kam dot mff.cuni.cz ---
With the inliner tweaks (which I hope to get bit more aggressive this
week) we "solved" the wrf compile time with LTO by simply not building
the gigantic functions. However we still have si
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102943
--- Comment #32 from Richard Biener ---
But they are in reasonable territory now, no longer slowest of all but in the
same ballpark as others.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102943
--- Comment #31 from Jan Hubicka ---
With g:r12-5872-gf157c5362b4844f7676cae2aba81a4cf75bd68d5 I limited inliner to
not produce such a large function, so bumping up --param
max-inline-functions-called-once-insns will be necessary to reproduce th
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102943
--- Comment #30 from Aldy Hernandez ---
(In reply to Jan Hubicka from comment #28)
> Bit unrelated but shows that threader seems bit expensive on other builds
> too.
> Getting stats from cc1plus LTO-link with -flto-partition=one it seems that
>
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102943
--- Comment #29 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Jan Hubicka :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:a70faf6e4df7481c2c9a08a06657c20beb3043de
commit r12-5538-ga70faf6e4df7481c2c9a08a06657c20beb3043de
Author: Jan Hubicka
Date: Fri
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102943
--- Comment #28 from Jan Hubicka ---
Bit unrelated but shows that threader seems bit expensive on other builds too.
Getting stats from cc1plus LTO-link with -flto-partition=one it seems that
backwards threader and dom are two slowest tree passes
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102943
Bug 102943 depends on bug 103058, which changed state.
Bug 103058 Summary: [12 Regression] ICE in gimple_call_static_chain_flags, at
gimple.c:1669 when building 527.cam4_r
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103058
What|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102943
--- Comment #27 from hubicka at kam dot mff.cuni.cz ---
>
> This PR is still open, at least for slowdown in the threader with LTO. The
> issue is ranger wide, so it may also cause slowdowns on non-LTO builds for
> WRF, though I haven't checked
>
> This PR is still open, at least for slowdown in the threader with LTO. The
> issue is ranger wide, so it may also cause slowdowns on non-LTO builds for
> WRF, though I haven't checked.
I just wanted to record the fact somewhere since I was looking up the
revision range mostly to figure out i
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102943
--- Comment #26 from Aldy Hernandez ---
(In reply to Jan Hubicka from comment #25)
> LNT sees new regresion on WRF build times (around 6%) at Nov 3
>
> https://lnt.opensuse.org/db_default/v4/SPEC/graph?plot.0=287.548.8
> https://lnt.opensuse.or
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102943
--- Comment #25 from Jan Hubicka ---
LNT sees new regresion on WRF build times (around 6%) at Nov 3
https://lnt.opensuse.org/db_default/v4/SPEC/graph?plot.0=287.548.8
https://lnt.opensuse.org/db_default/v4/SPEC/graph?plot.0=289.270.8
The revis
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102943
--- Comment #24 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Andrew Macleod :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:98244c68e77cf75f93b66ee02df059f718c3fbc0
commit r12-4947-g98244c68e77cf75f93b66ee02df059f718c3fbc0
Author: Andrew MacLeod
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102943
--- Comment #23 from Martin Liška ---
(In reply to Aldy Hernandez from comment #22)
> (In reply to Martin Liška from comment #21)
> > > For the record, I hate the SPEC build system :).
> >
> > Then you're the first one! No, just kidding, it's c
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102943
--- Comment #22 from Aldy Hernandez ---
(In reply to Martin Liška from comment #21)
> > For the record, I hate the SPEC build system :).
>
> Then you're the first one! No, just kidding, it's cumbersome, and feel free
> to contact me with questi
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102943
--- Comment #21 from Martin Liška ---
> For the record, I hate the SPEC build system :).
Then you're the first one! No, just kidding, it's cumbersome, and feel free to
contact me with questions regarding that...
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102943
--- Comment #20 from Aldy Hernandez ---
With attachment 51726 and current trunk, the present damage is 22% for the
ltrans105 unit, which AFAICT, is the worst offender. This is much better than
the original 44%, but still not ideal.
After some
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102943
--- Comment #19 from hubicka at kam dot mff.cuni.cz ---
> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102943
>
> Aldy Hernandez changed:
>
>What|Removed |Added
>
> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102943
>
> Aldy Hernandez changed:
>
>What|Removed |Added
>
> Depends on||103058
>
> --- Comment #
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102943
Aldy Hernandez changed:
What|Removed |Added
Depends on||103058
--- Comment #18 from Aldy Herna
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102943
--- Comment #17 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Aldy Hernandez :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:6a9678f0b30d36ae13259ad635e175a1e24917a1
commit r12-4905-g6a9678f0b30d36ae13259ad635e175a1e24917a1
Author: Aldy Hernandez
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102943
--- Comment #16 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Aldy Hernandez :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:e4411622690654cdc530c6262c7115a9e15dc359
commit r12-4904-ge4411622690654cdc530c6262c7115a9e15dc359
Author: Aldy Hernandez
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102943
--- Comment #15 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Aldy Hernandez :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:5ea1ce43b6070aaa94882e8b15f3340344aaa6b2
commit r12-4903-g5ea1ce43b6070aaa94882e8b15f3340344aaa6b2
Author: Aldy Hernandez
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102943
--- Comment #14 from rguenther at suse dot de ---
On Wed, 3 Nov 2021, amacleod at redhat dot com wrote:
> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102943
>
> --- Comment #13 from Andrew Macleod ---
>
>
> > >
> > > This is a large CFG,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102943
--- Comment #13 from Andrew Macleod ---
> >
> > This is a large CFG, so a linear search of a BB, is bound to be slow.
>
> Indeed, vec should never have gotten ::contains () ... I'd have
> used a regular bitmap, not sbitmap, because we do
>
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102943
--- Comment #12 from rguenther at suse dot de ---
On Wed, 3 Nov 2021, aldyh at gcc dot gnu.org wrote:
> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102943
>
> Aldy Hernandez changed:
>
>What|Removed |Adde
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102943
--- Comment #11 from Aldy Hernandez ---
Created attachment 51726
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=51726&action=edit
untested improvement to ranger cache
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102943
Aldy Hernandez changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||amacleod at redhat dot com
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102943
--- Comment #9 from Aldy Hernandez ---
(In reply to Richard Biener from comment #8)
> The 'tree VRP threader' instances are now gone (well, obviously..). There's
> now
>
> backwards jump threading : 15.98 ( 13%)
> TOTAL
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102943
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|[12 Regression] VRP |[12 Regression] Jump
48 matches
Mail list logo
