https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88440
--- Comment #11 from rguenther at suse dot de <rguenther at suse dot de> --- On Fri, 17 May 2019, marxin at gcc dot gnu.org wrote: > https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88440 > > --- Comment #10 from Martin Liška <marxin at gcc dot gnu.org> --- > > So the only significant offender is module_configure.fppized.f90 file. Let > > me profile it. > > Time profile before/after: > > ╔══════════════════════════╤════════╤════════╤═════════╗ > ║ PASS │ Before │ After │ Change ║ > ╠══════════════════════════╪════════╪════════╪═════════╣ > ║ backwards jump threading │ 6.29 │ 6.16 │ 97.93% ║ > ║ integrated RA │ 6.76 │ 6.41 │ 94.82% ║ > ║ tree SSA incremental │ 9.01 │ 11.16 │ 123.86% ║ > ║ LRA create live ranges │ 15.68 │ 40.02 │ 255.23% ║ > ║ PRE │ 23.24 │ 32.32 │ 139.07% ║ > ║ alias stmt walking │ 27.69 │ 28.75 │ 103.83% ║ > ║ phase opt and generate │ 124.13 │ 163.95 │ 132.08% ║ > ║ TOTAL │ 125.39 │ 165.17 │ 131.73% ║ > ╚══════════════════════════╧════════╧════════╧═════════╝ > > Richi, do you want a perf report or do you come up with a patch that will > introduce the aforementioned params? Can you share -fopt-report-loop differences? From the above I would guess we split a lot of loops, meaning the memcpy/memmove/memset calls are in the "middle" and we have to split loops (how many calls are detected here?). If that's true another way would be to only allow calls at head or tail position, thus a single non-builtin partition.
