Re: [PATCH 0/3] RFC: Let debug stmts influence codegen at -Og

2019-06-24 Thread Richard Sandiford
Segher Boessenkool writes: > On Mon, Jun 24, 2019 at 04:28:34PM +0200, Jakub Jelinek wrote: >> On Sun, Jun 23, 2019 at 02:51:06PM +0100, Richard Sandiford wrote: >> > What do you think? Is it worth pursuing this further? >> >> Wouldn't it be more useful to just force all automatic variables to b

Re: [PATCH 0/3] RFC: Let debug stmts influence codegen at -Og

2019-06-24 Thread Segher Boessenkool
On Mon, Jun 24, 2019 at 04:28:34PM +0200, Jakub Jelinek wrote: > On Sun, Jun 23, 2019 at 02:51:06PM +0100, Richard Sandiford wrote: > > What do you think? Is it worth pursuing this further? > > Wouldn't it be more useful to just force all automatic variables to be > used at the end of their corre

Re: [PATCH 0/3] RFC: Let debug stmts influence codegen at -Og

2019-06-24 Thread Jakub Jelinek
On Sun, Jun 23, 2019 at 02:51:06PM +0100, Richard Sandiford wrote: > What do you think? Is it worth pursuing this further? Wouldn't it be more useful to just force all automatic variables to be used at the end of their corresponding scope? That is IMHO the main issue with -Og debugging, VTA is a

Re: [PATCH 0/3] RFC: Let debug stmts influence codegen at -Og

2019-06-24 Thread Richard Sandiford
Segher Boessenkool writes: > Hi! > > What does -O1g do with OPT_LEVELS_1_PLUS_NOT_DEBUG, is it enabled or > not there? Maybe that name needs to change, with your patches? It is > currently documented as > > /* -O1 (and not -Og) optimizations. */ Yeah, comment should change to be: /* -

Re: [PATCH 0/3] RFC: Let debug stmts influence codegen at -Og

2019-06-24 Thread Segher Boessenkool
Hi! What does -O1g do with OPT_LEVELS_1_PLUS_NOT_DEBUG, is it enabled or not there? Maybe that name needs to change, with your patches? It is currently documented as /* -O1 (and not -Og) optimizations. */ Segher

Re: [PATCH 0/3] RFC: Let debug stmts influence codegen at -Og

2019-06-24 Thread Richard Sandiford
Richard Biener writes: > On Sun, Jun 23, 2019 at 3:51 PM Richard Sandiford > wrote: >> To get an idea of the runtime cost, I tried compiling tree-into-ssa.ii >> at -O2 -g with various --enable-checking=yes builds of cc1plus: >> >> time taken >> cc1plus compiled with -O

Re: [PATCH 0/3] RFC: Let debug stmts influence codegen at -Og

2019-06-24 Thread Richard Biener
On Sun, Jun 23, 2019 at 3:51 PM Richard Sandiford wrote: > > -Og is documented as: > > @option{-Og} should be the optimization > level of choice for the standard edit-compile-debug cycle, offering > a reasonable level of optimization while maintaining fast compilation > and a good debuggin

[PATCH 0/3] RFC: Let debug stmts influence codegen at -Og

2019-06-23 Thread Richard Sandiford
-Og is documented as: @option{-Og} should be the optimization level of choice for the standard edit-compile-debug cycle, offering a reasonable level of optimization while maintaining fast compilation and a good debugging experience. It is a better choice than @option{-O0} for producing