Re: [PATCH] Adjust call stmt cost for tailcalls

2012-06-26 Thread Richard Guenther
On Sat, 23 Jun 2012, Jan Hubicka wrote: > > > > Tailcalls have no argument setup cost and no return value cost. > > This patch adjusts estminate_num_insns to reflect that. > > > > Honza, does this look correct? > > > > Bootstrapped and tested on x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu. > > > > Thanks, > > Ri

Re: [PATCH] Adjust call stmt cost for tailcalls

2012-06-22 Thread Jan Hubicka
> > Tailcalls have no argument setup cost and no return value cost. > This patch adjusts estminate_num_insns to reflect that. > > Honza, does this look correct? > > Bootstrapped and tested on x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu. > > Thanks, > Richard. > > 2012-06-20 Richard Guenther > > * tree-

[PATCH] Adjust call stmt cost for tailcalls

2012-06-20 Thread Richard Guenther
Tailcalls have no argument setup cost and no return value cost. This patch adjusts estminate_num_insns to reflect that. Honza, does this look correct? Bootstrapped and tested on x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu. Thanks, Richard. 2012-06-20 Richard Guenther * tree-inline.c (estimate_num_ins