Caroline Tice wrote:
There might be some validity in the idea of modifying this optimization,
in the future, to consider
the size of a basic block in addition to it's "hot-ness", when deciding
which partition to put it into.
I expect this would not be that difficult to implement, and would
proba
I apologize for not responding to these messages sooner; I was out of
town for a few days and only
just read them.
In the first place, I am a little confused about exactly what Joern is
objecting to. If I am reading your
emails correctly, you seem to feel that the hot/cold partitioning
optimiz
Dale Johannesen wrote:
No, you should not turn on partitioning in situations where code
size is important to you.
You are missing the point. In my example, with perfect profiling
data, you still end up with
more code in the hot section,
Yes.
i.e. more pages are actually swapped in.
Unles
On Feb 28, 2005, at 10:19 AM, Joern RENNECKE wrote:
Dale Johannesen wrote:
Certainly. In general it will make the total size bigger, as does
inlining. If you have good
information about what's hot and cold, it should reduce the number of
pages that actually
get swapped in. The information h
Dale Johannesen wrote:
Certainly. In general it will make the total size bigger, as does
inlining. If you have good
information about what's hot and cold, it should reduce the number of
pages that actually
get swapped in. The information has to be good, though, as a branch from
hot<->cold
On Mon, 2005-02-28 at 10:01 -0800, Dale Johannesen wrote:
> On Feb 28, 2005, at 4:43 AM, Joern RENNECKE wrote:
>
> > Dale Johannesen wrote:
> >
> >>Well, no, what is supposed to happen (I haven't tried it for a
> >> while, so I don't promise
> >> this still works) is code like this:
> >>
> >>
On Feb 28, 2005, at 4:43 AM, Joern RENNECKE wrote:
Dale Johannesen wrote:
Well, no, what is supposed to happen (I haven't tried it for a
while, so I don't promise
this still works) is code like this:
.hotsection:
loop:
conditional branch (i?==1000) to L2
L1:
/* do stuff */
end loop:
/* sti
On Mon, Feb 28, 2005 at 12:43:35PM +, Joern RENNECKE wrote:
> Well, even then, using of the cold section can increase the hot section
> size, depending on target, and for some
> targets the maximum supported distance of the cold section.
>
> For SH, using the cold section, you get (for non-PI
Dale Johannesen wrote:
Well, no, what is supposed to happen (I haven't tried it for a while,
so I don't promise
this still works) is code like this:
.hotsection:
loop:
conditional branch (i?==1000) to L2
L1:
/* do stuff */
end loop:
/* still in hot section */
L2: jmp L3
.coldsection:
L3
On Feb 25, 2005, at 9:47 AM, Joern RENNECKE wrote:
consider:
for (;;i++ )
{
if (i == 1000)
i = 0;
/* do stuff... */
}
The "i = 0;" statement is in its own cold block.
On a number of targets, a conditional jump can't reach the cold
section, so you'd have to replace a condjump around a s
In http://gcc.gnu.org/wiki/Hot%20and%20Cold%20Partitioning, you wrote:
> Modifying the hot/cold partitioning optimization to make sure ALL the
> hot blocks come before ALL the cold blocks in the RTL representation.
> This in turn will allow for the elimination of the UNLIKELY notes in
> each cold b
11 matches
Mail list logo
