Re: [Ping]Two pending IVOPT patches

2014-01-12 Thread Bin.Cheng
On Mon, Jan 13, 2014 at 2:29 PM, Jeff Law wrote: > On 01/11/14 02:21, Bin.Cheng wrote: >> >> On Sat, Jan 11, 2014 at 5:07 PM, Jakub Jelinek wrote: >>> >>> On Sat, Jan 11, 2014 at 05:02:26PM +0800, Bin.Cheng wrote: > > I reduced the case and attached ivopt dumps with/without the patch. >>>

Re: [Ping]Two pending IVOPT patches

2014-01-12 Thread Jeff Law
On 01/11/14 02:21, Bin.Cheng wrote: On Sat, Jan 11, 2014 at 5:07 PM, Jakub Jelinek wrote: On Sat, Jan 11, 2014 at 05:02:26PM +0800, Bin.Cheng wrote: I reduced the case and attached ivopt dumps with/without the patch. It seems the patch is doing right thing and choosing better candidates, most

Re: [Ping]Two pending IVOPT patches

2014-01-12 Thread Jeff Law
On 01/11/14 02:07, Jakub Jelinek wrote: On Sat, Jan 11, 2014 at 05:02:26PM +0800, Bin.Cheng wrote: I reduced the case and attached ivopt dumps with/without the patch. It seems the patch is doing right thing and choosing better candidates, most likely it reveals an existing bug. I am looking into

Re: [Ping]Two pending IVOPT patches

2014-01-11 Thread Bin.Cheng
On Sat, Jan 11, 2014 at 5:07 PM, Jakub Jelinek wrote: > On Sat, Jan 11, 2014 at 05:02:26PM +0800, Bin.Cheng wrote: >> > I reduced the case and attached ivopt dumps with/without the patch. >> > It seems the patch is doing right thing and choosing better >> > candidates, most likely it reveals an ex

Re: [Ping]Two pending IVOPT patches

2014-01-11 Thread Jakub Jelinek
On Sat, Jan 11, 2014 at 05:02:26PM +0800, Bin.Cheng wrote: > > I reduced the case and attached ivopt dumps with/without the patch. > > It seems the patch is doing right thing and choosing better > > candidates, most likely it reveals an existing bug. > > I am looking into this issue, in the meantim

Re: [Ping]Two pending IVOPT patches

2014-01-11 Thread Bin.Cheng
On Sat, Jan 11, 2014 at 2:42 PM, Bin.Cheng wrote: > On Wed, Dec 11, 2013 at 4:18 AM, Jeff Law wrote: >> On 12/10/13 00:01, bin.cheng wrote: >>> >>> Emm, some kind of. See the cost of iv candidate set consists of several >>> parts, the representation cost in cost pair; the register pressure cost

Re: [Ping]Two pending IVOPT patches

2013-12-10 Thread Jeff Law
On 12/10/13 00:01, bin.cheng wrote: Emm, some kind of. See the cost of iv candidate set consists of several parts, the representation cost in cost pair; the register pressure cost falls in dependence on invariant expressions, etc.. Here iv_ca_has_deps checks whether new cost pair depends on oth

RE: [Ping]Two pending IVOPT patches

2013-12-09 Thread bin.cheng
> -Original Message- > From: gcc-patches-ow...@gcc.gnu.org [mailto:gcc-patches- > ow...@gcc.gnu.org] On Behalf Of Jeff Law > Sent: Tuesday, December 10, 2013 6:31 AM > To: Bin.Cheng > Cc: gcc-patches List; Richard Biener; Zdenek Dvorak > Subject: Re: [Ping]Two

Re: [Ping]Two pending IVOPT patches

2013-12-09 Thread Jeff Law
On 11/26/13 03:52, Bin.Cheng wrote: On Tue, Nov 26, 2013 at 6:06 AM, Jeff Law wrote: On 11/25/13 02:11, Bin.Cheng wrote: Slightly tune to make iv cand choosing algorithm more accurate: http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2013-11/msg01574.html It would help if you had some sample codes where

Re: [Ping]Two pending IVOPT patches

2013-12-06 Thread Jeff Law
On 12/06/13 02:37, Bin.Cheng wrote: Do you have any codes where iv_ca_extend helps? I can see how that hunk appears to be safe, and I'm guessing that setting the cost pair at each step could potentially give more accurate costing on the next iteration of the loop. But I'd love to be able to se

Re: [Ping]Two pending IVOPT patches

2013-12-06 Thread Bin.Cheng
On Fri, Dec 6, 2013 at 2:10 PM, Jeff Law wrote: > On 11/26/13 03:52, Bin.Cheng wrote: >> >> On Tue, Nov 26, 2013 at 6:06 AM, Jeff Law wrote: >>> >>> On 11/25/13 02:11, Bin.Cheng wrote: Slightly tune to make iv cand choosing algorithm more accurate: http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/g

Re: [Ping]Two pending IVOPT patches

2013-12-05 Thread Jeff Law
On 11/26/13 03:52, Bin.Cheng wrote: On Tue, Nov 26, 2013 at 6:06 AM, Jeff Law wrote: On 11/25/13 02:11, Bin.Cheng wrote: Slightly tune to make iv cand choosing algorithm more accurate: http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2013-11/msg01574.html It would help if you had some sample codes where

Re: [Ping]Two pending IVOPT patches

2013-11-25 Thread Jeff Law
On 11/25/13 02:11, Bin.Cheng wrote: Slightly tune to make iv cand choosing algorithm more accurate: http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2013-11/msg01574.html It would help if you had some sample codes where this patch was useful. I can kind-of see what's going on, but I'm way too unfamiliar with

[Ping]Two pending IVOPT patches

2013-11-25 Thread Bin.Cheng
Hi all, There are still two patches on IVOPT pending for review now. Since others have already approved and applied, I am wondering whether these two can be reviewed and get in if ok. Improve IVOPT to handle outside and inside loop iv uses differently in GCC: http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/201