| Message ID | 6f87f645-1d42-e8ff-3533-d789a7ab512d@gmail.com |
|---|---|
| State | New |
| Headers | show |
| Series | [PATCH/doc] - mention all optimization options that enable inlining options | expand |
On Sun, 8 Apr 2018, Martin Sebor wrote: > While updating the -Wrestrict option to mention that it works > best not just with -O2 but also at higher optimization levels > I looked around for other options that might benefit from > a similar clarification. I found a few inlining options that > only mention -O2 but that (according to -Q --help=optimizers) > are enabled at other levels as well. The attached patch > changes the manual to reflect that. OK. > Given the large number of options I didn't take the time to > check all optimization options so there could others that could > stand to be similarly improved if we want to be 100% accurate. > If that is, in fact, what we want then we might want to script > this. Yeah, note we now have -Og and -Ofast as well... Richard.
On 04/09/2018 01:36 AM, Richard Biener wrote: > On Sun, 8 Apr 2018, Martin Sebor wrote: > >> While updating the -Wrestrict option to mention that it works >> best not just with -O2 but also at higher optimization levels >> I looked around for other options that might benefit from >> a similar clarification. I found a few inlining options that >> only mention -O2 but that (according to -Q --help=optimizers) >> are enabled at other levels as well. The attached patch >> changes the manual to reflect that. > > OK. I committed it earlier today in r259250. > >> Given the large number of options I didn't take the time to >> check all optimization options so there could others that could >> stand to be similarly improved if we want to be 100% accurate. >> If that is, in fact, what we want then we might want to script >> this. > > Yeah, note we now have -Og and -Ofast as well... Right, those aren't mentioned. With so many flavors of -O does enumerating them all for each optimization option still make sense? I wonder if this could this be generated by some script instead (it would probably have to be presented in the form of a table but that might actually make things easier to find). Martin
On Mon, 9 Apr 2018, Martin Sebor wrote: > On 04/09/2018 01:36 AM, Richard Biener wrote: > > On Sun, 8 Apr 2018, Martin Sebor wrote: > > > > > While updating the -Wrestrict option to mention that it works > > > best not just with -O2 but also at higher optimization levels > > > I looked around for other options that might benefit from > > > a similar clarification. I found a few inlining options that > > > only mention -O2 but that (according to -Q --help=optimizers) > > > are enabled at other levels as well. The attached patch > > > changes the manual to reflect that. > > > > OK. > > I committed it earlier today in r259250. > > > > > > Given the large number of options I didn't take the time to > > > check all optimization options so there could others that could > > > stand to be similarly improved if we want to be 100% accurate. > > > If that is, in fact, what we want then we might want to script > > > this. > > > > Yeah, note we now have -Og and -Ofast as well... > > Right, those aren't mentioned. With so many flavors of -O does > enumerating them all for each optimization option still make > sense? I wonder if this could this be generated by some script > instead (it would probably have to be presented in the form of > a table but that might actually make things easier to find). I think it would be reasonable to say "level two or higher" and in the -On docs specify what "level" means (two is -O2 or -Os). Then say "lever two or higher but not for -Os", thus enumerate exceptions instead. Another phrase would be "enabled by default if optimizing" for all the passes we enable at all -On but -O0. Richard.
2018-04-08 Martin Sebor <msebor@redhat.com> * invoke.texi (-finline-small-functions): Mention other optimization options. (-findirect-inlining, -fpartial-inlining): Same. (-finline-functions-called-once): Same. (-freorder-blocks-and-partition): Same. Index: gcc/doc/invoke.texi =================================================================== --- gcc/doc/invoke.texi (revision 259224) +++ gcc/doc/invoke.texi (working copy) @@ -7780,7 +7780,7 @@ heuristically decides which functions are simple e in this way. This inlining applies to all functions, even those not declared inline. -Enabled at level @option{-O2}. +Enabled at levels @option{-O2}, @option{-O3}, @option{-Os}. @item -findirect-inlining @opindex findirect-inlining @@ -7789,7 +7789,7 @@ time thanks to previous inlining. This option has when inlining itself is turned on by the @option{-finline-functions} or @option{-finline-small-functions} options. -Enabled at level @option{-O2}. +Enabled at levels @option{-O2}, @option{-O3}, @option{-Os}. @item -finline-functions @opindex finline-functions @@ -7801,7 +7801,7 @@ If all calls to a given function are integrated, a declared @code{static}, then the function is normally not output as assembler code in its own right. -Enabled at level @option{-O3}. +Enabled at levels @option{-O2}, @option{-O3}, @option{-Os}. @item -finline-functions-called-once @opindex finline-functions-called-once @@ -9002,7 +9002,7 @@ Inline parts of functions. This option has any ef when inlining itself is turned on by the @option{-finline-functions} or @option{-finline-small-functions} options. -Enabled at level @option{-O2}. +Enabled at levels @option{-O2}, @option{-O3}, @option{-Os}. @item -fpredictive-commoning @opindex fpredictive-commoning @@ -9109,7 +9109,7 @@ sections. When @option{-fsplit-stack} is used thi enabled by default (to avoid linker errors), but may be enabled explicitly (if using a working linker). -Enabled for x86 at levels @option{-O2}, @option{-O3}. +Enabled for x86 at levels @option{-O2}, @option{-O3}, @option{-Os}. @item -freorder-functions @opindex freorder-functions