On 01/06/14 13:40, Richard Henderson wrote:
On 12/19/2013 11:06 AM, Richard Biener wrote:
Aldy Hernandez wrote:
I'd still like to catch the common cases, like I do with this patch.
Perhaps we move this code to the .tmmark pass and handle the
uninstrumented case. rth?
tmmark is way way late
On 01/06/14 15:04, Aldy Hernandez wrote:
On 01/06/14 13:40, Richard Henderson wrote:
On 12/19/2013 11:06 AM, Richard Biener wrote:
Aldy Hernandez wrote:
I'd still like to catch the common cases, like I do with this patch.
Perhaps we move this code to the .tmmark pass and handle the
uninstrum
On 01/06/14 13:40, Richard Henderson wrote:
On 12/19/2013 11:06 AM, Richard Biener wrote:
Aldy Hernandez wrote:
I'd still like to catch the common cases, like I do with this patch.
Perhaps we move this code to the .tmmark pass and handle the
uninstrumented case. rth?
tmmark is way way late
On 12/19/2013 11:06 AM, Richard Biener wrote:
> Aldy Hernandez wrote:
>> I'd still like to catch the common cases, like I do with this patch.
>>
>> Perhaps we move this code to the .tmmark pass and handle the
>> uninstrumented case. rth?
tmmark is way way later than you'd want. I believe that
Aldy Hernandez wrote:
>
>>> I'm still unsure whether the IPA inliner (not the early inliner)
>will add
>>> other nested transactions, so we may have to do everything in
>.tmmark and
>>> handle the dual code paths :(. Either way, this is a start.
>>
>> Sure it will. At least with cross-unit inlin
I'm still unsure whether the IPA inliner (not the early inliner) will add
other nested transactions, so we may have to do everything in .tmmark and
handle the dual code paths :(. Either way, this is a start.
Sure it will. At least with cross-unit inlining with LTO. You can of
course simply
On Thu, Dec 19, 2013 at 5:04 PM, Aldy Hernandez wrote:
> As discussed in the PR, we already remove nested transactions in the tmlower
> stage, but inlining may add more nested transactions later.
>
> The problem with removing these nested transactions after proper IPA, is
> that we'd either have t
As discussed in the PR, we already remove nested transactions in the
tmlower stage, but inlining may add more nested transactions later.
The problem with removing these nested transactions after proper IPA, is
that we'd either have to add another IPA pass later or remove the
problematic transa
