https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=43515
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=43515
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||missed-optimization
--- Comment #5 from
--- Comment #4 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-03-26 13:01 ---
Well, it's like you say -ftree-pre but a partial redundancy is not removed
because it was on a cold path. bb-reorder should probably take into account
size/speed optimization in more general and the optimize_functio
--- Comment #3 from rahul at icerasemi dot com 2010-03-26 12:25 ---
The following test in 'rest_of_handle_reorder_blocks'
if ((flag_reorder_blocks || flag_reorder_blocks_and_partition)
&& optimize_function_for_speed_p (cfun))
{ ... }
suggests when optimize_size is true reordering
--- Comment #2 from steven at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-03-26 12:24 ---
No, the user should be able to say "do this" and then the compiler should do
so. Right now the flag to enable BB-reorder has no effect at -Os, and that is a
bug.
--
steven at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
--- Comment #1 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-03-26 11:49 ---
It's disabled on a function-by-function basis which looks valid.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=43515
