On Wed, Apr 13, 2011 at 8:43 PM, Nathan Froyd froy...@codesourcery.com wrote:
On Wed, Apr 13, 2011 at 11:07:15AM +0200, Richard Guenther wrote:
On Tue, Apr 12, 2011 at 5:09 PM, Nathan Froyd froy...@codesourcery.com
wrote:
Granted, but that fact should still be recorded. The situation we
On Tue, Apr 12, 2011 at 5:09 PM, Nathan Froyd froy...@codesourcery.com wrote:
On Tue, Apr 12, 2011 at 04:54:43PM +0200, Richard Guenther wrote:
On Tue, Apr 12, 2011 at 4:51 PM, Nathan Froyd froy...@codesourcery.com
wrote:
True, but maybe those testcases should be adjusted--per-pass flags,
On Wed, Apr 13, 2011 at 11:07:15AM +0200, Richard Guenther wrote:
On Tue, Apr 12, 2011 at 5:09 PM, Nathan Froyd froy...@codesourcery.com
wrote:
Granted, but that fact should still be recorded. The situation we have
today, for something like:
func1: statistic for statx was 0
-
It's a shame more passes don't make use of the statistics_*
infrastructure. This patch is a step towards rectifying that and adds
statistics_counter_event calls to passes mentioned in $SUBJECT.
postreload-gcse already tracked the stats for the dump file and so only
needs the
On Tue, Apr 12, 2011 at 4:16 PM, Nathan Froyd froy...@codesourcery.com wrote:
It's a shame more passes don't make use of the statistics_*
infrastructure. This patch is a step towards rectifying that and adds
statistics_counter_event calls to passes mentioned in $SUBJECT.
postreload-gcse
On Tue, Apr 12, 2011 at 04:27:01PM +0200, Richard Guenther wrote:
On Tue, Apr 12, 2011 at 4:16 PM, Nathan Froyd froy...@codesourcery.com
wrote:
It's a shame more passes don't make use of the statistics_*
infrastructure. This patch is a step towards rectifying that and adds
On Tue, Apr 12, 2011 at 4:51 PM, Nathan Froyd froy...@codesourcery.com wrote:
On Tue, Apr 12, 2011 at 04:37:42PM +0200, Richard Guenther wrote:
On Tue, Apr 12, 2011 at 4:32 PM, Nathan Froyd froy...@codesourcery.com
wrote:
Thanks. I may go twiddle that patch to do something similar to mine
On Tue, Apr 12, 2011 at 4:37 PM, Richard Guenther
richard.guent...@gmail.com wrote:
Yes, I used it exactly for that. And also to verify that passes don't
do anything if replicated (well, for those that shouldn't at least).
What about passes that undo the work of previous patches -- and then
On Tue, Apr 12, 2011 at 04:54:43PM +0200, Richard Guenther wrote:
On Tue, Apr 12, 2011 at 4:51 PM, Nathan Froyd froy...@codesourcery.com
wrote:
True, but maybe those testcases should be adjusted--per-pass flags,
rather than blindly assuming -O2 includes them. And it's not clear to
It's
