Re: question about inlining long call sequence

2019-02-13 Thread Bin.Cheng
On Tue, Feb 12, 2019 at 6:16 PM Martin Jambor wrote: > > On Tue, Feb 12 2019, Bin.Cheng wrote: > > Hi, > > When reading inlining code in GCC, I wonder if we have size heuristics > > to limit inlining long call sequence? For example, for call sequence > > A -> B -> C -> D -> ... -> X -> Y -> Z > >

Re: question about inlining long call sequence

2019-02-12 Thread Martin Jambor
On Tue, Feb 12 2019, Bin.Cheng wrote: > Hi, > When reading inlining code in GCC, I wonder if we have size heuristics > to limit inlining long call sequence? For example, for call sequence > A -> B -> C -> D -> ... -> X -> Y -> Z > if each function call grows size by a very small amount, inlining Z

Re: question about inlining

2017-12-08 Thread Richard Biener
On December 8, 2017 6:50:17 PM GMT+01:00, Martin Sebor wrote: >On 12/08/2017 12:00 AM, Richard Biener wrote: >> On December 8, 2017 4:26:05 AM GMT+01:00, Martin Sebor > wrote: >>> On 12/06/2017 11:45 PM, Richard Biener wrote: On December 7, 2017 2:15:53 AM GMT+01:00, Martin Sebor >>> wrote:

Re: question about inlining

2017-12-08 Thread Martin Sebor
On 12/08/2017 12:00 AM, Richard Biener wrote: On December 8, 2017 4:26:05 AM GMT+01:00, Martin Sebor wrote: On 12/06/2017 11:45 PM, Richard Biener wrote: On December 7, 2017 2:15:53 AM GMT+01:00, Martin Sebor wrote: On 12/06/2017 12:11 PM, Richard Biener wrote: On December 6, 2017 6:38:11

Re: question about inlining

2017-12-07 Thread Richard Biener
On December 8, 2017 4:26:05 AM GMT+01:00, Martin Sebor wrote: >On 12/06/2017 11:45 PM, Richard Biener wrote: >> On December 7, 2017 2:15:53 AM GMT+01:00, Martin Sebor > wrote: >>> On 12/06/2017 12:11 PM, Richard Biener wrote: On December 6, 2017 6:38:11 PM GMT+01:00, Martin Sebor >>> wrote:

Re: question about inlining

2017-12-07 Thread Martin Sebor
On 12/06/2017 11:45 PM, Richard Biener wrote: On December 7, 2017 2:15:53 AM GMT+01:00, Martin Sebor wrote: On 12/06/2017 12:11 PM, Richard Biener wrote: On December 6, 2017 6:38:11 PM GMT+01:00, Martin Sebor wrote: While testing a libstdc++ patch that relies on inlining to expose a GCC lim

Re: question about inlining

2017-12-06 Thread Richard Biener
On December 7, 2017 2:15:53 AM GMT+01:00, Martin Sebor wrote: >On 12/06/2017 12:11 PM, Richard Biener wrote: >> On December 6, 2017 6:38:11 PM GMT+01:00, Martin Sebor > wrote: >>> While testing a libstdc++ patch that relies on inlining to >>> expose a GCC limitation I noticed that the same member

Re: question about inlining

2017-12-06 Thread Martin Sebor
On 12/06/2017 12:11 PM, Richard Biener wrote: On December 6, 2017 6:38:11 PM GMT+01:00, Martin Sebor wrote: While testing a libstdc++ patch that relies on inlining to expose a GCC limitation I noticed that the same member function of a class template is inlined into one function in the test but

Re: question about inlining

2017-12-06 Thread Richard Biener
On December 6, 2017 6:38:11 PM GMT+01:00, Martin Sebor wrote: >While testing a libstdc++ patch that relies on inlining to >expose a GCC limitation I noticed that the same member function >of a class template is inlined into one function in the test but >not into the other, even though it is inline

Re: Question about inlining and strict_aliasing

2017-01-09 Thread Martin Liška
On 01/09/2017 02:34 PM, Jan Hubicka wrote: >> Hello. >> >> I've been working on a patch that would cope with target and optimization >> (read PerFunction) >> in a proper way. I came to following test-case (slightly modified >> ./gcc/testsuite/gcc.c-torture/execute/alias-1.c): >> >> int val; >> >>

Re: Question about inlining and strict_aliasing

2017-01-09 Thread Jan Hubicka
> Hello. > > I've been working on a patch that would cope with target and optimization > (read PerFunction) > in a proper way. I came to following test-case (slightly modified > ./gcc/testsuite/gcc.c-torture/execute/alias-1.c): > > int val; > > int *ptr = &val; > float *ptr2 = &val; > > stati