On Tue, 25 Jul 2017, Alexander Monakov wrote:
> --- a/gcc/domwalk.c
> +++ b/gcc/domwalk.c
> @@ -128,19 +128,46 @@ along with GCC; see the file COPYING3. If not see
> which is currently an abstraction over walking tree statements. Thus
> the dominator walker is currently only useful for
On Tue, Jul 25, 2017 at 10:22 AM, Alexander Monakov wrote:
> On Mon, 24 Jul 2017, Jeff Law wrote:
>> As Uli noted, we should be using std::swap.
>>
>> Can you please repost ?
>
> * domwalk.c (cmp_bb_postorder): Simplify.
> (sort_bbs_postorder): New function. Use it...
> (d
On Mon, 24 Jul 2017, Jeff Law wrote:
> As Uli noted, we should be using std::swap.
>
> Can you please repost ?
* domwalk.c (cmp_bb_postorder): Simplify.
(sort_bbs_postorder): New function. Use it...
(dom_walker::walk): ...here to optimize common cases.
---
gcc/domwalk.c
On 07/24/2017 05:29 AM, Alexander Monakov wrote:
> Profiling uses of qsort in GCC reveals that a significant portion of calls
> comes from domwalk.c where child nodes in dominator tree are reordered
> according to postorder numbering. However we know that in dominator trees
> the vast majority of
Not commenting on the correctness... but
On Mon, Jul 24, 2017 at 1:29 PM, Alexander Monakov wrote:
> + basic_block bb0 = bbs[0], bb1 = bbs[1];
> + if (bb_postorder[bb0->index] < bb_postorder[bb1->index])
> + bbs[0] = bb1, bbs[1] = bb0;
> +}
> + else if (__builtin_expect (n ==
