chandlerc added inline comments.
================ Comment at: llvm/test/tools/gold/X86/opt-level.ll:53 + ; CHECK-O1-OLDPM: select + ; The new PM does not do as many optimizations at O1 + ; CHECK-O1-NEWPM: phi ---------------- tejohnson wrote: > tejohnson wrote: > > mehdi_amini wrote: > > > This is intended? I'm surprised the two PMs don't have the same list of > > > passes for a given opt level? > > I'm really not sure. I did compare the post-link LTO pipelines of both PMs > > at O0/O1/O2 and confirmed that the old PM is doing many more passes than > > the new PM at O1. Probably a question for @chandlerc ? In any case, I > > didn't want to address it here since it is orthogonal. > Some more info: > > This is the regular LTO post-link pipeline, ThinLTO post-link pipeline uses > essentially the same as a normal opt pipeline so would be consistent at -O1. > > The optimization missing from the new PM regular LTO post link pipeline that > affects this test is SimplifyCFG. This and a few other optimizations are > added in the old PM at O1 via > PassManagerBuilder::addLateLTOOptimizationPasses. Note that > PassManagerBuilder::addLTOOptimizationPasses does exit early at -O1 (similar > to where we exit early in the new PM for the regular LTO post link > compilation). But the "late" LTO optimization passes are added > unconditionally above -O0. Is this correct/desired? There isn't an equivalent > in the new PM. I don't think it was intentional, but I'm not sure I would directly replicate it if it requires adding an entirely new customization point. Is their some simpler way of getting equivalent results at O1? Repository: rG LLVM Github Monorepo CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D61022/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D61022 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
