> -Original Message-
> From: Eric Botcazou [mailto:ebotca...@adacore.com]
> Sent: Thursday, September 13, 2012 10:31 PM
> To: Zhenqiang Chen
> Cc: gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org; 'Steven Bosscher'; 'Richard Guenther'
> Subject: Re: [PATCH] Enable bbro
> The updated patched is attached. Is it OK?
Yes, OK for mainline.
--
Eric Botcazou
ubject: Re: [PATCH] Enable bbro for -Os
>
> > All other comments are accepted.
> >
> > The updated patch is attached. Is it OK?
>
> As you probably gathered, I had missed that Steven and Richard had already
> commented on your patch before posting my message. So
On 09/06/2012 02:56 AM, Zhenqiang Chen wrote:
> + (3) Keep its original order when there is no chance to fall through. bbro
> + bases on the result of cfg_cleanup, which does lots of optimizations on
> cfg.
> + So the order is expected to be kept if no fall through.
Thanks for doing this.
> All other comments are accepted.
>
> The updated patch is attached. Is it OK?
As you probably gathered, I had missed that Steven and Richard had already
commented on your patch before posting my message. Sorry about that...
I think that the patch is interesting because, even if it doesn't ex
Thank you for the comments.
> -Original Message-
> From: Eric Botcazou [mailto:ebotca...@adacore.com]
> Sent: Wednesday, September 05, 2012 9:39 PM
> To: Zhenqiang Chen
> Cc: gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
> Subject: Re: [PATCH] Enable bbro for -Os
>
> > Basic block
> Basic block reordering is disabled for -Os from gcc 4.7 since the pass will
> lead to big code size regression. But benchmarks logs also show there are
> lots of regression due to poor code layout compared with 4.6.
>
> The patch is to enable bbro for -Os. When optimizing for size, it
> * avoid
