search for: releasethinlto

...number of stores eliminated in many cases (e.g. across MultiSource/SPEC2000/SPEC2006 with -O3 -flto, the number of eliminated stores increases roughly by 45%, with some benchmarks seeing much larger improvements). But the improvements come at additional compile-time cost (CTmark geomean -O3 +0.86%, ReleaseThinLTO +1.59%), due to a substantially increased search space. I’d like to propose to switch to MemorySSA-backed DSE, as in my opinion the benefits in terms of store reductions outweigh the compile-time impact). Details: First, lets take a look at the benefits: 1. More dead stores eliminated. The cu...

...ves most of the run > time benefits, I would vote for enabling as is. > > I’ve been working on some additional changes to bring compile-time down a > bit further, while keeping the number of eliminated stores at a similar > level. Geomeans: > -O3 +0.62% > ReleaseThinLTO +1.06%, > ReleaseLTO-g +0.79% Re > ReleaseThinLTO (link-only) +0.96% > ReleaseLTO-G (link only). +0.80% > > > http://llvm-compile-time-tracker.com/compare.php?from=e19ef1aab524ef10a2d118adcd9f6fd6ca2d7ca9&to=c6812412983b4ebb20f1e32b83893284c8117e7f&stat=instruct...

Hi Florian, First, thank you for working on this. I'm really glad to see this work so close to being enabled. I think the numbers look good for run time, and the benefits of switching for all configurations are clear. For compile time, the current regressions are noticeable, but not a deal breaker in my opinion. I'm very much in favor of switching in all configurations. To address some