- User Since
- Feb 12 2020, 11:23 AM (49 w, 20 h)
Tue, Jan 19
I don't understand the non-deterministic part, but otherwise this makes sense
@sbc100 is this ok?
Fri, Jan 15
just a general comment, I do like the idea of printing diffs between passes, could make looking through pipelines much nicer
overall looks good, just a couple small comments
Wondering if this makes sense to you (before I go and finish cleaning up all the tests)
Thu, Jan 14
move max BB check into areInlineCompatible
It's not an emergency.
The issue with InlineAdvisorAnalysis is that the ModuleInlineWrapperPass presets the InliningAdvisorMode of the InlineAdvisorAnalysis. We could force override it, but then what's the point of InlineAdvisorAnalysis? Can't we just create an InlineAdvisor in the pass itself rather than using a wrapper like InlineAdvisorAnalysis?
Wed, Jan 13
An alternative is to run the mandatory inliner in the same CGSCC pipeline as everything else, but the way InlineAdvisorAnalysis is setup made it hard to implement
fix ARM unswitch test: looks like minsize functions are becoming smaller, which is good
Tue, Jan 12
rebase past https://reviews.llvm.org/D94187
is this good to go?
Mon, Jan 11
Fri, Jan 8
Thu, Jan 7
WDYT about adding optnone to all functions except the ones you're interested in? Would that cut down the compile times?
We could reuse ForceFunctionAttrsPass rather than adding so much plumbing. This is too much plumbing for my liking.
make function static
Was split into multiple changes
Wed, Jan 6
I suppose doing some benchmarking would be ideal, but this makes sense, I can't imagine why these sorts of functions wouldn't be inlined other than attributes like coldcc/noinline.