On April 16, 2019 6:10:11 PM GMT+02:00, Michael Matz <m...@suse.de> wrote: >Hi, > >On Tue, 16 Apr 2019, Richard Biener wrote: > >> Comments? > >I was quickly testing also with some early-outs but didn't get >conclusive >performance results (but really only superficial testing) so I'm not >proposing it, like so:
Btw, this caller accounts for 30% of the calls to cp_build_qualified_type of which not all end up in build_qualified_type. >diff --git a/gcc/cp/typeck.c b/gcc/cp/typeck.c >index 7045284..33f56f9 100644 >--- a/gcc/cp/typeck.c >+++ b/gcc/cp/typeck.c >@@ -1508,6 +1508,10 @@ same_type_ignoring_top_level_qualifiers_p (tree > if (type1 == error_mark_node || type2 == error_mark_node) > return false; > >+ if (type1 == type2) >+ return true; >+ if (TYPE_MAIN_VARIANT (type1) != TYPE_MAIN_VARIANT (type2)) >+ return false; > type1 = cp_build_qualified_type (type1, TYPE_UNQUALIFIED); > type2 = cp_build_qualified_type (type2, TYPE_UNQUALIFIED); > > >Ciao, >Michael.
