https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=72855
--- Comment #3 from amker at gcc dot gnu.org --- (In reply to amker from comment #1) > Among all loops in the large function, how many loops can be doloop > optimized successfully? Function doloop__optimize has some valid checks on > doloop optimizations. Is it possible to move most (some) of checks outside > of the per-loop function. Looks like targetm.invalid_within_doloop can be > moved. As a result, we can know some loops can't be doloop optimized, so > the iv_analysis/df_analysis can be skipped for those loops. For checks on > loop analysis result: > if (!desc->simple_p > || desc->assumptions > || desc->infinite) > I think it's possible to avoid per-loop analysis behavior too. Since we > don't change code, there is no need to do df analysis for each loop before > iv_analysis. As a result, df_verify can be saved. We may need a new > interface analyzing iv/loop_desc for all loops in loop-iv.c > > Of course, if most loops can be doloop optimized, this may not be able to > help. As suspected, most loop can't be doloop optimized by the target dependent insn check. I am testing a simple refactoring patch to see if it can reduce compile time.
