https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78288
--- Comment #6 from Richard Biener <rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org> --- (In reply to Richard Biener from comment #5) > Created attachment 48848 [details] > patch statistics show it's not always a win for the overall number of processed blocks. stage3 of a GCC boostrap for gcc/ files shows (first number is trunk, second is patched) counting the number of fibheap extracts: a-conftest.c.324t.statistics 1 1 adjust-alignment.c.324t.statistics 48 47 alias.c.324t.statistics 3078 3340 alloc-pool.c.324t.statistics 46 43 asan.c.324t.statistics 3205 3022 attribs.c.324t.statistics 2093 2127 auto-inc-dec.c.324t.statistics 6 6 auto-profile.c.324t.statistics 2896 4546 bb-reorder.c.324t.statistics 3806 5965 bitmap.c.324t.statistics 2303 2276 builtins.c.324t.statistics 7263 7097 caller-save.c.324t.statistics 1076 1459 calls.c.324t.statistics 4959 6321 cc1-checksum.c.324t.statistics cc1plus-checksum.c.324t.statistics ccmp.c.324t.statistics 195 195 cet.c.324t.statistics 8 8 cfg.c.324t.statistics 1329 1276 cfganal.c.324t.statistics 2021 2154 cfgbuild.c.324t.statistics 880 1076 cfgcleanup.c.324t.statistics 3545 5586 cfgexpand.c.324t.statistics 8038 8337 cfghooks.c.324t.statistics 1425 1521 cfgloop.c.324t.statistics 2963 3300 cfgloopanal.c.324t.statistics 644 792 cfgloopmanip.c.324t.statistics 1961 2042 cfgrtl.c.324t.statistics 4604 5242 cgraph.c.324t.statistics 4489 4232 cgraphbuild.c.324t.statistics 377 398 cgraphclones.c.324t.statistics 1205 1173 cgraphunit.c.324t.statistics 2943 3768 collect-utils.c.324t.statistics 59 58 collect2-aix.c.324t.statistics 1 1 collect2.c.324t.statistics 766 867 combine-stack-adj.c.324t.statistics 519 760 combine.c.324t.statistics 8697 9667 compare-elim.c.324t.statistics 600 652 context.c.324t.statistics 6 6 convert.c.324t.statistics 1135 1135 coroutine-passes.cc.324t.statistics 780 908 coverage.c.324t.statistics 1328 1458 cppbuiltin.c.324t.statistics 62 62 cppdefault.c.324t.statistics 7 7 cprop.c.324t.statistics 1165 1903 cse.c.324t.statistics 5849 7881 cselib.c.324t.statistics 3037 2982 data-streamer-in.c.324t.statistics 72 63 data-streamer-out.c.324t.statistics 263 238 data-streamer.c.324t.statistics 65 71 dbgcnt.c.324t.statistics 250 320 dbxout.c.324t.statistics 2832 2652 dce.c.324t.statistics 1356 1530 ddg.c.324t.statistics 1047 1708 debug.c.324t.statistics 16 16 df-core.c.324t.statistics 1412 1534 df-problems.c.324t.statistics 3574 4339 df-scan.c.324t.statistics 3223 3431 dfp.c.324t.statistics 106 106 diagnostic-color.c.324t.statistics 120 121 diagnostic-format-json.cc.324t.statistics 93 91 diagnostic-show-locus.c.324t.statistics 1787 1759 diagnostic.c.324t.statistics 718 698 digraph.cc.324t.statistics 576 560 dojump.c.324t.statistics 1253 1144 dominance.c.324t.statistics 1447 1651 domwalk.c.324t.statistics 288 310 double-int.c.324t.statistics 535 476 driver-i386.c.324t.statistics 574 670 dse.c.324t.statistics 2719 3515 dumpfile.c.324t.statistics 1677 1693 dwarf2asm.c.324t.statistics 580 550 dwarf2cfi.c.324t.statistics 2264 2404 dwarf2out.c.324t.statistics 32574 32617 early-remat.c.324t.statistics 2373 3489 edit-context.c.324t.statistics 960 959 emit-rtl.c.324t.statistics 5075 5084 errors.c.324t.statistics 49 44 et-forest.c.324t.statistics 614 514 except.c.324t.statistics 2857 2752 explow.c.324t.statistics 778 758 expmed.c.324t.statistics 2692 2501 expr.c.324t.statistics 9552 9399 fibonacci_heap.c.324t.statistics 806 742 file-find.c.324t.statistics 75 73 file-prefix-map.c.324t.statistics 19 17 final.c.324t.statistics 2692 2895 fixed-value.c.324t.statistics 357 351 fold-const-call.c.324t.statistics 900 891 fold-const.c.324t.statistics 13221 12822 function-abi.cc.324t.statistics 202 272 function-tests.c.324t.statistics 324 324 function.c.324t.statistics 5441 5523 fwprop.c.324t.statistics 1057 1044 gcc-ar.c.324t.statistics 56 55 gcc-main.c.324t.statistics 2 2 gcc-nm.c.324t.statistics 53 52 gcc-ranlib.c.324t.statistics 53 52 gcc-rich-location.c.324t.statistics 77 73 gcc.c.324t.statistics 5953 6594 gcov-dump.c.324t.statistics 453 526 gcov-tool.c.324t.statistics 198 261 gcov.c.324t.statistics 3554 4749 gcse-common.c.324t.statistics 239 391 gcse.c.324t.statistics 2284 3321 generic-match.c.324t.statistics 47432 46970 gengtype-lex.c.324t.statistics 524 760 gengtype-parse.c.324t.statistics 597 672 gengtype-state.c.324t.statistics 2120 2317 gengtype.c.324t.statistics 2897 3544 ggc-common.c.324t.statistics 922 867 ggc-none.c.324t.statistics 11 11 ggc-page.c.324t.statistics 965 963 ggc-tests.c.324t.statistics 556 570 gimple-array-bounds.cc.324t.statistics 775 641 gimple-builder.c.324t.statistics 55 55 gimple-expr.c.324t.statistics 1067 938 gimple-fold.c.324t.statistics 6076 6045 gimple-isel.cc.324t.statistics 420 405 gimple-iterator.c.324t.statistics 447 427 gimple-laddress.c.324t.statistics 82 111 gimple-loop-interchange.cc.324t.statistics 2657 3525 gimple-loop-jam.c.324t.statistics 511 770 gimple-loop-versioning.cc.324t.statistics 1808 2744 gimple-low.c.324t.statistics 732 678 gimple-match.c.324t.statistics 79313 78121 gimple-pretty-print.c.324t.statistics 2177 2165 gimple-ssa-backprop.c.324t.statistics 916 890 gimple-ssa-evrp-analyze.c.324t.statistics 614 640 gimple-ssa-evrp.c.324t.statistics 45 45 ... web.c.324t.statistics 438 679 wide-int-print.cc.324t.statistics 83 81 wide-int.cc.324t.statistics 1914 1816 x86-tune-sched-atom.c.324t.statistics 185 265 x86-tune-sched-bd.c.324t.statistics 208 217 x86-tune-sched-core.c.324t.statistics 79 84 x86-tune-sched.c.324t.statistics 235 220 xcoffout.c.324t.statistics 1 1 and overall it's a loss as well with previously 1190266 visits and patched 1314850. I would expect that for nested CFG cycles only immediately iterating the outermost one should be always profitable, and if we processed all backedge predecessors and the dataflow was unchanged on them, backtrack to the earliest inner cycle that needs re-processing. So consider the patch withdrawn in its current form. But as can be seen there's sth to gain from looking at the iteration scheme. Inventing some reasonable behavior for unvisited backedges and thus doing a non-iterative scheme for large routines might also be sth to investigate. I've noticed the odd intesection vs. unioning of the IN dataflow solutions keyed on MAY_HAVE_DEBUG_BIND_INSNS but maybe it's just a documentation wart.
