> On Tue, 1 Mar 2005 13:30:41 +0100, Jan Hubicka <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > On Tue, 1 Mar 2005 02:03:57 +0100, Jan Hubicka <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > > > OK, I will put this higher in the TODO list (but this is not 4.0 > > > > either). What was those less unrealistic tests? I remember seeing node > > > > removal in profiles, but edge removal comes first here. Looks like I > > > > finally recovered everything from disc crash so will have time to look > > > > into this in the rest of the week... > > > > > > I see those functions high up in the profiles with tramp3d and leafify > > > turned > > > on, too. I remember bugging you about this a few month ago... > > > > > > http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc/2004-11/msg00737.html > > > > OK, thanks, this time I will remember this ;)) I believe that I > > oprofiled it that shot remove_edge down from profile, but I have to > > re-try. > > Try this,. bootstrapped on i686-pc-linux-gnu in progress.
Looks nice, you might also consider turing next_clone list into doubly linked list to speedup remove_node somewhat. Not sure how much that one counts. Can you post --disable-checking benchmarks on your testcase with leafify? Honza > > Richard.
