Hi
I've managed to compile gimple-match.c with -ftime-report, and "phase opt and
generate" seems to be what takes most of the compilation time. This is captured
by the "TV_PHASE_OPT_GEN" timevar, and all its occurrences seem to be in
toplev.c and lto.c. Any ideas of which part such that this varia
Hey Rainer,
> On 15 Jan 2019, at 17:27, Rainer Orth wrote:
>>> On 14 Jan 2019, at 13:53, Rainer Orth wrote:
>>>
>>> "MCC CS" writes:
>>>
I've been running the testsuite on my macOS, on which
it is especially unbearable. I want to (at least try to)
>>>
>>> that problem may well be
Hi Iain,
>> On 14 Jan 2019, at 13:53, Rainer Orth wrote:
>>
>> "MCC CS" writes:
>>
>>> I've been running the testsuite on my macOS, on which
>>> it is especially unbearable. I want to (at least try to)
>>
>> that problem may well be macOS specific: since at least macOS 10.13
>> (maybe even 10
On Tue, Jan 15, 2019 at 4:43 PM Frank Tetzel
wrote:
>
> > > why is the ICF pass in gcc not folding member functions which
> > > depend on a template parameter but happen to generate identical
> > > code? Is it because it is not identical on the IR level in the
> > > compiler? Can I somehow dump th
> > why is the ICF pass in gcc not folding member functions which
> > depend on a template parameter but happen to generate identical
> > code? Is it because it is not identical on the IR level in the
> > compiler? Can I somehow dump the IR in text form?
>
> You can look at the ICF dump generate
On Tue, Jan 15, 2019 at 2:18 PM Frank Tetzel
wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> why is the ICF pass in gcc not folding member functions which depend on
> a template parameter but happen to generate identical code?
> Is it because it is not identical on the IR level in the compiler?
> Can I somehow dump the IR in
Hi,
why is the ICF pass in gcc not folding member functions which depend on
a template parameter but happen to generate identical code?
Is it because it is not identical on the IR level in the compiler?
Can I somehow dump the IR in text form?
The ICF pass in the gold linker can do it on binary le
Why not give the wierdo __has_include__ an unspellable name?
('builtinhasinclude') and take care constructing the
__has_include macro expansion to have a token with exactly that
spelling?
Wouldn't that break -dM rather horribly?
pah!
However, the following thinks __DATE__ is a defined ma
Hi all,
Analysed it further and find out that
function ' rs6000_promote_function_mode ' (rs6000.c) needs modifcation.
"""
static machine_mode
rs6000_promote_function_mode (const_tree type ATTRIBUTE_UNUSED,
machine_mode mode,
int *punsigne