https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86078
Bug ID: 86078 Summary: Documentation: missing param default values Product: gcc Version: unknown Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: web Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org Reporter: ptdrnvqd at 10mail dot org Target Milestone: --- in https://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/gcc/Optimize-Options.html or https://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/gcc-5.5.0/gcc/Optimize-Options.html or whatever number, the params section at the bottom does not link/reference source-code e.g. https://github.com/gcc-mirror/gcc/blob/master/gcc/params.def it contains max,min and default values, along with description, includes default values not mentioned in documentation, along with disagreements e.g. sched-state-edge-prob-cutoff&selsched-insns-to-rename in docs(gcc6+) changes name, err correction, but not reflected|updated in older doc versions could this be automated/scripted (link to source-code) to reduce human errors? missing default doc max-crossjump-edges=100 max-delay-slot-insn-search=100 max-delay-slot-live-search=333 max-gcse-memory=50*1024*1024 (2015) max-gcse-memory=128*1024*1024 (2018) max-modulo-backtrack-attempts=40 iv-consider-all-candidates-bound=30(2015) iv-consider-all-candidates-bound=40(2018) iv-max-considered-uses=250 scev-max-expr-size=100 scev-max-expr-complexity=10 max-partial-antic-length=100 devirt-type-list-size(4.6),ipa-cp-value-list-size(4.7+)=8 max-slsr-cand-scan=50(4.8+) ipa-max-agg-items=16(4.9+) ipa-max-aa-steps=25000(5+) max-ssa-name-query-depth=3(6+) max-speculative-devirt-maydefs=50(6+) max-stores-to-merge=64(7+) dse-max-object-size=256(7+) Not mentioned @docs except SourceCode max-tracked-strlens=10000 what impact do they have, anyway to emit debug info to show whether compilation hit limits? to generalize, for benchmarks should an average of params be used? should gcc params better reflect the host-compile-machine instead of a one-size-fits all (compiling on mobile|desktop|workstation|server, new|old) another question: when compiling using link-time-optimization-LTO, since it's bunched into a single unit would it hit the limits sooner and should it be compensated for against any mechanism for compile more/less aggressively based on usage patters, how much (CPU-time|usage/day) a program uses (relevance)