search for: maxopt

If I understand the attributes correctly, they would be function-level attributes applied to IR functions, correct? I'm curious what the semantics would be for cross-function optimization. For example, consider a function "foo" defined with maxopt and a function "bar" defined with optsize. If foo() calls bar() and the inliner wants to inline bar() into foo(), is that legal? If so, that may cause odd effects as you may perform expensive optimizations later on the inlined version of bar(), even though the original function is marke...

...gmail.com> wrote: > If I understand the attributes correctly, they would be function-level > attributes applied to IR functions, correct? I'm curious what the > semantics would be for cross-function optimization. For example, consider > a function "foo" defined with maxopt and a function "bar" defined with > optsize. If foo() calls bar() and the inliner wants to inline bar() into > foo(), is that legal? If so, that may cause odd effects as you may perform > expensive optimizations later on the inlined version of bar(), even though > the origin...

Chandler Carruth <chandlerc at gmail.com> writes: > minsizeopt > sizeopt > quickopt > opt > maxopt I prefer being consistent and putting "opt" at the end. I would still like something other than "opt" for the fourth one. "opt" seems too generic given the other levels. -David

...pact as possible. This level should always produce binaries at least as fast as optsize, but they might be both bigger and faster. This level should always produce binaries at least as fast as quickopt, but they might be both slower to compile. 5) Optimize to the max or '-O3' - Attribute: maxopt (new attribute) - Goal: produce the fastest binary possible. This level has historically been almost exclusively about trading off more binary size for speed than '-O2', but I would propose we change it to be more about trading off either binary size or compilation time to achieve a better...

On Mon, Jan 14, 2013 at 1:30 PM, <dag at cray.com> wrote: > Chandler Carruth <chandlerc at gmail.com> writes: > > > minsizeopt > > sizeopt > > quickopt > > opt > > maxopt > > I prefer being consistent and putting "opt" at the end. > > I would still like something other than "opt" for the fourth one. "opt" > seems too generic given the other levels. > I agree that having just "opt" seems too generic in compa...

...t gmail.com>wrote: > If I understand the attributes correctly, they would be function-level > attributes applied to IR functions, correct? I'm curious what the > semantics would be for cross-function optimization. For example, consider > a function "foo" defined with maxopt and a function "bar" defined with > optsize. If foo() calls bar() and the inliner wants to inline bar() into > foo(), is that legal? If so, that may cause odd effects as you may perform > expensive optimizations later on the inlined version of bar(), even though > the origin...

...ndlerc at gmail.com> writes: > 4) Good, well-balanced optimizations, or '-O2' > - Attribute: opt (new attribute) Since all other levels have a qualifier, I'd suggest we do that here as well. Perhaps balancedopt? > 5) Optimize to the max or '-O3' > - Attribute: maxopt (new attribute) > - Goal: produce the fastest binary possible. > This level should always produce binaries at least as fast as opt, but > they might be faster at the cost of them being larger and taking more > time to compile. That's almost impossible to achieve if you include thi...

...Kaelyn Uhrain <rikka at google.com> wrote: > On Mon, Jan 14, 2013 at 1:30 PM, <dag at cray.com> wrote: > >> Chandler Carruth <chandlerc at gmail.com> writes: >> >> > minsizeopt >> > sizeopt >> > quickopt >> > opt >> > maxopt >> >> I prefer being consistent and putting "opt" at the end. >> >> I would still like something other than "opt" for the fourth one. "opt" >> seems too generic given the other levels. >> > > I agree that having just "opt...

...>always produce binaries at least as fast as optsize, but they might be >both >bigger and faster. This level should always produce binaries at least >as >fast as quickopt, but they might be both slower to compile. > > >5) Optimize to the max or '-O3' >- Attribute: maxopt (new attribute) >- Goal: produce the fastest binary possible. >This level has historically been almost exclusively about trading off >more >binary size for speed than '-O2', but I would propose we change it to >be >more about trading off either binary size or compilation t...

...is level should always produce binaries at least as fast as optsize, but they might be both bigger and faster. This level should always produce binaries at least as fast as quickopt, but they might be both slower to compile. > > > 5) Optimize to the max or '-O3' > - Attribute: maxopt (new attribute) > - Goal: produce the fastest binary possible. > This level has historically been almost exclusively about trading off more binary size for speed than '-O2', but I would propose we change it to be more about trading off either binary size or compilation time to achieve...