On Fri, Sep 25, 2020 at 4:15 PM Martin Liška wrote:
>
> On 9/25/20 3:45 PM, Richard Biener wrote:
> > On Fri, Sep 25, 2020 at 3:32 PM Martin Liška wrote:
> >>
> >> On 9/25/20 3:18 PM, Richard Biener wrote:
> >>> On Fri, Sep 25, 2020 at 11:13 AM Martin Liška wrote:
>
> Hello.
>
> >
On 9/25/20 3:45 PM, Richard Biener wrote:
On Fri, Sep 25, 2020 at 3:32 PM Martin Liška wrote:
On 9/25/20 3:18 PM, Richard Biener wrote:
On Fri, Sep 25, 2020 at 11:13 AM Martin Liška wrote:
Hello.
All right, I come up with a rapid speed up that can allow us to remove
the introduced paramet
On 9/25/20 3:52 PM, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
On Fri, Sep 25, 2020 at 11:13:06AM +0200, Martin Liška wrote:
--- a/gcc/tree-switch-conversion.c
+++ b/gcc/tree-switch-conversion.c
@@ -1268,6 +1268,15 @@ jump_table_cluster::can_be_handled (const vec
&clusters,
if (range == 0)
return false;
On Fri, Sep 25, 2020 at 11:13:06AM +0200, Martin Liška wrote:
> --- a/gcc/tree-switch-conversion.c
> +++ b/gcc/tree-switch-conversion.c
> @@ -1268,6 +1268,15 @@ jump_table_cluster::can_be_handled (const vec *> &clusters,
>if (range == 0)
> return false;
>
> + unsigned HOST_WIDE_INT lhs
On Fri, Sep 25, 2020 at 3:32 PM Martin Liška wrote:
>
> On 9/25/20 3:18 PM, Richard Biener wrote:
> > On Fri, Sep 25, 2020 at 11:13 AM Martin Liška wrote:
> >>
> >> Hello.
> >>
> >> All right, I come up with a rapid speed up that can allow us to remove
> >> the introduced parameter. It contains 2
On 9/25/20 3:18 PM, Richard Biener wrote:
On Fri, Sep 25, 2020 at 11:13 AM Martin Liška wrote:
Hello.
All right, I come up with a rapid speed up that can allow us to remove
the introduced parameter. It contains 2 parts:
- BIT TEST: we allow at maximum a range that is smaller GET_MODE_BITSIZE
On Fri, Sep 25, 2020 at 11:13 AM Martin Liška wrote:
>
> Hello.
>
> All right, I come up with a rapid speed up that can allow us to remove
> the introduced parameter. It contains 2 parts:
> - BIT TEST: we allow at maximum a range that is smaller GET_MODE_BITSIZE
> - JT: we spent quite some time in
Hello.
All right, I come up with a rapid speed up that can allow us to remove
the introduced parameter. It contains 2 parts:
- BIT TEST: we allow at maximum a range that is smaller GET_MODE_BITSIZE
- JT: we spent quite some time in density calculation, we can guess it first
and it leads to a fa
On Tue, Sep 22, 2020 at 02:19:12PM +0200, Richard Biener via Gcc-patches wrote:
> On September 22, 2020 1:22:12 PM GMT+02:00, "Martin Liška"
> wrote:
> >Hi.
> >
> >The patch is about a bail out limit that needs to be added to switch
> >lowering.
> >Currently the algorithm is quadratic and needs s
On 9/22/20 2:19 PM, Richard Biener wrote:
OK. Though the default limit looks high?
Yep, I'm going to install it with the param default value
equal to 1.
Thanks,
Martin
On September 22, 2020 1:22:12 PM GMT+02:00, "Martin Liška"
wrote:
>Hi.
>
>The patch is about a bail out limit that needs to be added to switch
>lowering.
>Currently the algorithm is quadratic and needs some bail out. I've
>tested value
>of 100K which corresponds to about 0.2s in the problematic t
Hi.
The patch is about a bail out limit that needs to be added to switch lowering.
Currently the algorithm is quadratic and needs some bail out. I've tested value
of 100K which corresponds to about 0.2s in the problematic test-case before
it's reached.
Patch can bootstrap on x86_64-linux-gnu and
12 matches
Mail list logo
