sorry, The numbers were too good, something was wrong in my setup.
thanks, Dinar,
>> before:
>>Base Base Base Peak
>> Peak Peak
>>BenchmarksRef Time Run Time RatioRef Time Run Time Ratio
>>---
On Tue, Mar 26, 2013 at 10:31 AM, Richard Biener wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 25, 2013 at 10:23 PM, Dinar Temirbulatov wrote:
>> The error in 252.eon was due to incorrect setup. Also "if (count >
>> 3*PARAM_VALUE (PARAM_SWITCH_JUMP_TABLES_BB_OPS_LIMIT))" does not look
>> correct, and probably it is better
On Mon, Mar 25, 2013 at 10:23 PM, Dinar Temirbulatov
wrote:
> Hi,
> We noticed some performance gains if we are not using jump over some
> simple switch statements. Here is the idea: Check whether the switch
> statement can be expanded with conditional instructions. In that case
> jump tables shou
On Tue, Mar 26, 2013 at 01:23:58AM +0400, Dinar Temirbulatov wrote:
> Hi,
> We noticed some performance gains if we are not using jump over some
> simple switch statements. Here is the idea: Check whether the switch
> statement can be expanded with conditional instructions. In that case
> jump tabl
Hi,
We noticed some performance gains if we are not using jump over some
simple switch statements. Here is the idea: Check whether the switch
statement can be expanded with conditional instructions. In that case
jump tables should be avoided since some branch instructions can be
eliminated in furth
On Fri, 2013-03-22 at 13:00 -0600, Jeff Law wrote:
> There's a BZ for this issue with a bit more state for this issue.
>
> jeff
Found it. http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54742
Steve Ellcey
sell...@imgtec.com
On Fri, 2013-03-22 at 13:00 -0600, Jeff Law wrote:
> As others have pointed out, this is jump threading.
>
> The reason you're not seeing jump threading in the CoreMark test is the
> switch is inside a loop and threading a backedge is severely constrained.
>
> There's a BZ for this issue with a
On 03/22/2013 11:17 AM, Steve Ellcey wrote:
I am looking at implementing a GCC optimization pass based on constant
propagation into a switch statement.
Given:
if (expr)
s = 1;
codeX; (code that allows definition of s to propogate through)
On Fri, Mar 22, 2013 at 10:17 AM, Steve Ellcey wrote:
> I am looking at implementing a GCC optimization pass based on constant
> propagation into a switch statement.
>
> Given:
>
> if (expr)
> s = 1;
> codeX; (code that allows definition of s
How about finding the single-entry/single exit region that dominates
the switch and post-dominates the s assignment. You can then examine
if s is modified in the region.
David
On Fri, Mar 22, 2013 at 10:17 AM, Steve Ellcey wrote:
> I am looking at implementing a GCC optimization pass based on c
I am looking at implementing a GCC optimization pass based on constant
propagation into a switch statement.
Given:
if (expr)
s = 1;
codeX; (code that allows definition of s to propogate through)
switch (s) {
11 matches
Mail list logo
