Hello Segher: On 20/04/23 1:30 am, Segher Boessenkool wrote: > Hi! > > The subject should be something like > > rs6000: Enable REE pass by default > > (and no period at the end). > > On Wed, Apr 19, 2023 at 11:23:07PM +0530, Ajit Agarwal wrote: >> This is the patch-1 for improving ree pass for rs6000 target. > > It actually just enables it :-) > he c > The mail body should be the proposed commit message. Nothing more, > nothing less. If you need (or want) to talk about more things, that is > what a "0/4" message is for (you create that with --cover). Your patch > messages here do not thread properly, how did you create them? Things > work fine if you use git format-patch --thread :-) > >> ree: Improve ree pass for rs6000 target. >> >> Add ree pass as a default pass for rs6000 target. >> >> 2023-04-19 Ajit Kumar Agarwal <aagar...@linux.ibm.com> > > You aren't in MAINTAINERS yet, please fix that first! > >>
Done. Already added Write after approval in MAINTAINERS and pushed the changes. >> gcc/ChangeLog: >> >> * common/config/rs6000/rs6000-common.cc: Add REE pass as a >> default rs6000 target pass for O2 and above. > > Why only for -O2? Only when optimising at all makes sense, people use > -O0 only when they want to skip as many optimisations as possible, maybe > because of compilation time concerns, maybe to avoid an ICE or other > bug. Isn't REE *always* a good thing, it never degrades code quality? > Or are there situations where it results in worse code? > I think it should be O2 and above and am not sure how it behaves with O0. According to me, REE is always a good optimization to have and I don't think it degrades any performance or code quality. I don't see any situation where it results in worse code. It tries to remove extensions and combine them which will surely improves performance and code quality instead of worsening the code. Thanks & Regards Ajit > Segher
