On 09/10/2013 04:44 AM, Richard Biener wrote:
On Tue, Sep 10, 2013 at 10:11 AM, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
On Tue, Sep 10, 2013 at 10:06:04AM +0200, David Brown wrote:
This last point is crucial. I haven't looked at the code in question,
but one point to check is how the functions are called. If t
> >
> > But then inlining / cloning is no longer cheap, no? And will be
> > disabled at -O2?
>
> If you declare it "inline" and not "static inline" it will be inlined pretty
> much as before, only it will get unified if it ends up out of line in multiple
> units.
>
> Main difference in betwee
>
> But then inlining / cloning is no longer cheap, no? And will be
> disabled at -O2?
If you declare it "inline" and not "static inline" it will be inlined pretty
much as before, only it will get unified if it ends up out of line in multiple
units.
Main difference in between static and non-s
On Tue, Sep 10, 2013 at 11:06 AM, Jan Hubicka wrote:
>> On 10/09/13 10:11, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
>> > On Tue, Sep 10, 2013 at 10:06:04AM +0200, David Brown wrote:
>> >> This last point is crucial. I haven't looked at the code in question,
>> >> but one point to check is how the functions are calle
> On 10/09/13 10:11, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> > On Tue, Sep 10, 2013 at 10:06:04AM +0200, David Brown wrote:
> >> This last point is crucial. I haven't looked at the code in question,
> >> but one point to check is how the functions are called. If they are
> >> often called with constant values, th
On Tue, Sep 10, 2013 at 10:11 AM, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 10, 2013 at 10:06:04AM +0200, David Brown wrote:
>> This last point is crucial. I haven't looked at the code in question,
>> but one point to check is how the functions are called. If they are
>> often called with constant valu
On 10/09/13 10:11, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 10, 2013 at 10:06:04AM +0200, David Brown wrote:
>> This last point is crucial. I haven't looked at the code in question,
>> but one point to check is how the functions are called. If they are
>> often called with constant values, then they ma
On Tue, Sep 10, 2013 at 10:06:04AM +0200, David Brown wrote:
> This last point is crucial. I haven't looked at the code in question,
> but one point to check is how the functions are called. If they are
> often called with constant values, then they may be very much simplified
> due to constant p
On 10/09/13 04:44, Jeff Law wrote:
> On 09/09/2013 02:45 PM, Andrew MacLeod wrote:
>> A number of header files have inline functions declared in them. Some of
>> these functions are actually quite large, and I doubt that inlining them
>> is the right thing. For instance, tree-flow-inline.h has so
On 09/09/2013 02:45 PM, Andrew MacLeod wrote:
A number of header files have inline functions declared in them. Some of
these functions are actually quite large, and I doubt that inlining them
is the right thing. For instance, tree-flow-inline.h has some quite
large functions. Many of the op_it
A number of header files have inline functions declared in them. Some of
these functions are actually quite large, and I doubt that inlining them
is the right thing. For instance, tree-flow-inline.h has some quite
large functions. Many of the op_iter* functions are 30-40 lines long,
and get_
11 matches
Mail list logo
