On Sat, Nov 22, 2014 at 7:38 PM, Richard Biener
<richard.guent...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On November 22, 2014 12:24:22 PM CET, Eric Botcazou <ebotca...@adacore.com>
> wrote:
>>> Yeah, but after a couple of pings for a generic change, we went the
>>target
>>> way.
>>
>>That's a bit of a shame, the 400 -> 100 change was very likely tested
>>only on
>>x86-64 and nevetheless applied to the generic code, so the fix
>>repairing the
>>damages should also be applied to the generic code.
>
> A patch to bump the generic limit is OK.
>
> Targets that dont want it can reduce it in target specific code.
I have committed the attached patch:
2014-11-22 Uros Bizjak <ubiz...@gmail.com>
* params.def (PARAM_MAX_COMPLETELY_PEELED_INSNS): Increase to 200.
* config/i386/i386.c (ix86_option_override_internal): Do not increase
PARAM_MAX_COMPLETELY_PEELED_INSNS.
Bootstrapped on x86_64-linux-gnu.
Uros.
Index: params.def
===================================================================
--- params.def (revision 217961)
+++ params.def (working copy)
@@ -303,7 +303,7 @@ DEFPARAM(PARAM_MAX_PEEL_BRANCHES,
DEFPARAM(PARAM_MAX_COMPLETELY_PEELED_INSNS,
"max-completely-peeled-insns",
"The maximum number of insns of a completely peeled loop",
- 100, 0, 0)
+ 200, 0, 0)
/* The maximum number of peelings of a single loop that is peeled completely.
*/
DEFPARAM(PARAM_MAX_COMPLETELY_PEEL_TIMES,
"max-completely-peel-times",
Index: config/i386/i386.c
===================================================================
--- config/i386/i386.c (revision 217961)
+++ config/i386/i386.c (working copy)
@@ -4142,12 +4142,6 @@ ix86_option_override_internal (bool main_args_p,
opts->x_param_values,
opts_set->x_param_values);
- /* Increase full peel max insns parameter for x86. */
- maybe_set_param_value (PARAM_MAX_COMPLETELY_PEELED_INSNS,
- 200,
- opts->x_param_values,
- opts_set->x_param_values);
-
/* Enable sw prefetching at -O3 for CPUS that prefetching is helpful. */
if (opts->x_flag_prefetch_loop_arrays < 0
&& HAVE_prefetch
