On Thu, Nov 21, 2013 at 7:05 AM, Xinliang David Li wrote:
> Would it be sufficient to
>
> 1) get rid of the 'may_increase_size' parameter' in all the unroll
> interfaces (basically make it true for O2); and
> 2) set MAX_COMPLETELY_PEELED_INSNS parameter to be a smaller value for
> O2? -- this make
Would it be sufficient to
1) get rid of the 'may_increase_size' parameter' in all the unroll
interfaces (basically make it true for O2); and
2) set MAX_COMPLETELY_PEELED_INSNS parameter to be a smaller value for
O2? -- this makes O2 and O3's complete unroll behave in the same way
but with differen
Hi,
Currently, tree unrolling pass(cunroll) does not allow any code
size growth in O2 mode. Code size growth is permitted only if O3 or
funroll-loops/fpeel-loops is used. I have created a patch to allow
partial code size increase in O2 mode. With funroll-loops the maximum
allowed code growth
