Re: [PING] options: Clarify 'Init' option property usage for streaming optimization (was: [PATCH] options, lto: Optimize streaming of optimization nodes)

2022-10-26 Thread Joseph Myers
On Wed, 26 Oct 2022, Thomas Schwinge wrote: > Hi! > > Ping. For convenience, I've re-attached > "options: Clarify 'Init' option property usage for streaming optimization". > (I've re-verified: "No functional change; no change in generated files.") OK. -- Joseph S. Myers

[PING] options: Clarify 'Init' option property usage for streaming optimization (was: [PATCH] options, lto: Optimize streaming of optimization nodes)

2022-10-26 Thread Thomas Schwinge
Hi! Ping. For convenience, I've re-attached "options: Clarify 'Init' option property usage for streaming optimization". (I've re-verified: "No functional change; no change in generated files.") Grüße Thomas On 2022-03-31T15:22:59+0200, I wrote: > Hi! > > On 2020-11-18T10:36:35+0100, Jakub

options: Clarify 'Init' option property usage for streaming optimization (was: [PATCH] options, lto: Optimize streaming of optimization nodes)

2022-03-31 Thread Thomas Schwinge
Hi! On 2020-11-18T10:36:35+0100, Jakub Jelinek via Gcc-patches wrote: > Honza mentioned that especially for the new param machinery, most of > streamed values are probably going to be the default values. Perhaps > somehow we could stream them more effectively. > > This patch implements it and

Re: [PATCH] options, lto: Optimize streaming of optimization nodes

2020-11-18 Thread Joseph Myers
On Wed, 18 Nov 2020, Jakub Jelinek via Gcc-patches wrote: > Hi! > > Reposting with self-contained description per Joseph's request: > > Honza mentioned that especially for the new param machinery, most of > streamed values are probably going to be the default values. Perhaps > somehow we could

[PATCH] options, lto: Optimize streaming of optimization nodes

2020-11-18 Thread Jakub Jelinek via Gcc-patches
Hi! Reposting with self-contained description per Joseph's request: Honza mentioned that especially for the new param machinery, most of streamed values are probably going to be the default values. Perhaps somehow we could stream them more effectively. This patch implements it and brings

Patch ping (Re: [PATCH] options, lto: Optimize streaming of optimization nodes)

2020-10-05 Thread Jakub Jelinek via Gcc-patches
On Mon, Sep 14, 2020 at 11:47:56AM +0200, Jakub Jelinek via Gcc-patches wrote: > On Mon, Sep 14, 2020 at 11:02:26AM +0200, Jan Hubicka wrote: > > Especially for the new param machinery, most of streamed values are > > probably going to be the default values. Perhaps somehow we could > > stream

Re: [PATCH] options, lto: Optimize streaming of optimization nodes

2020-09-14 Thread Jakub Jelinek via Gcc-patches
On Mon, Sep 14, 2020 at 11:02:26AM +0200, Jan Hubicka wrote: > Especially for the new param machinery, most of streamed values are > probably going to be the default values. Perhaps somehow we could > stream them more effectively. Ah, that seems like a good idea, that brings further savings, the

Re: [PATCH] options, lto: Optimize streaming of optimization nodes

2020-09-14 Thread Richard Biener
On Mon, 14 Sep 2020, Jakub Jelinek wrote: > On Mon, Sep 14, 2020 at 09:31:52AM +0200, Richard Biener wrote: > > But does it make any noticable difference in the end? Using > > Yes. > > > bp_pack_var_len_unsigned just causes us to [u]leb encode half-bytes > > rather than full bytes. Using

Re: [PATCH] options, lto: Optimize streaming of optimization nodes

2020-09-14 Thread Jan Hubicka
> On Mon, Sep 14, 2020 at 09:31:52AM +0200, Richard Biener wrote: > > But does it make any noticable difference in the end? Using > > Yes. > > > bp_pack_var_len_unsigned just causes us to [u]leb encode half-bytes > > rather than full bytes. Using hardcoded 8/16/32/64 makes it still > >

Re: [PATCH] options, lto: Optimize streaming of optimization nodes

2020-09-14 Thread Jakub Jelinek via Gcc-patches
On Mon, Sep 14, 2020 at 09:31:52AM +0200, Richard Biener wrote: > But does it make any noticable difference in the end? Using Yes. > bp_pack_var_len_unsigned just causes us to [u]leb encode half-bytes > rather than full bytes. Using hardcoded 8/16/32/64 makes it still > dependent on what 'int'

Re: [PATCH] options, lto: Optimize streaming of optimization nodes

2020-09-14 Thread Richard Biener
On Mon, 14 Sep 2020, Jakub Jelinek wrote: > On Mon, Sep 14, 2020 at 08:39:22AM +0200, Richard Biener wrote: > > > When working on the previous patch, I've noticed that all cl_optimization > > > fields appart from strings are streamed with bp_pack_value (..., 64); so > > > we > > > waste quite a

Re: [PATCH] options, lto: Optimize streaming of optimization nodes

2020-09-14 Thread Jakub Jelinek via Gcc-patches
On Mon, Sep 14, 2020 at 08:39:22AM +0200, Richard Biener wrote: > > When working on the previous patch, I've noticed that all cl_optimization > > fields appart from strings are streamed with bp_pack_value (..., 64); so we > > waste quite a lot of space, given that many of the options are just

Re: [PATCH] options, lto: Optimize streaming of optimization nodes

2020-09-14 Thread Richard Biener
On Sun, 13 Sep 2020, Jakub Jelinek wrote: > Hi! > > When working on the previous patch, I've noticed that all cl_optimization > fields appart from strings are streamed with bp_pack_value (..., 64); so we > waste quite a lot of space, given that many of the options are just booleans > or char

[PATCH] options, lto: Optimize streaming of optimization nodes

2020-09-13 Thread Jakub Jelinek via Gcc-patches
Hi! When working on the previous patch, I've noticed that all cl_optimization fields appart from strings are streamed with bp_pack_value (..., 64); so we waste quite a lot of space, given that many of the options are just booleans or char options and there are 450-ish of them. Fixed by streaming