On Feb 8, 2016 9:17 AM, "Matt Turner" <<a href="mailto:mattst88@gmail.com">mattst88@gmail.com</a>> wrote: > > On Sun, Feb 7, 2016 at 8:06 AM, Jason Ekstrand <<a href="mailto:jason@jlekstrand.net">jason@jlekstrand.net</a>> wrote: > > > > On Feb 4, 2016 5:45 PM, "Matt Turner" <<a href="mailto:mattst88@gmail.com">mattst88@gmail.com</a>> wrote: > >> > >> Walking the SSA definitions in order means that we consider the smallest > >> algebraic optimizations before larger optimizations. So if a smaller > >> rule is part of a larger rule, the smaller one will happen first, > >> preventing the larger one from happening. > >> > >> instructions in affected programs: 32721 -> 32611 (-0.34%) > >> helped: 106 > >> > >> Prevents regressions and annoyances in the next commits. > > > > Mind doing just a little tooling to try and determine whether or not this > > increases the number of times the optimization loop runs? Some > > Optimizations may immediately allow some other optimization on their result > > which will now have to wait until the next time through the loop. > > In affected programs (129 of them): > > before: 1164 optimization loops > after: 1071 optimization loops > > Of the 129 affected, 16 programs' optimization loop counts increased. Good enough for me. Please add that to the commit message. R-B