On Wed, Oct 15, 2008 at 8:37 AM, Zdenek Dvorak <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hi,
>
>> > but you only take the hash of the argument of the phi node (i.e., the
>> > ssa name), not the computations on that it is based
>>
>> Is this something like what you had in mind ?
>>
>> gen_hash (stmt)
>> {
>>
>>
Hi,
> > but you only take the hash of the argument of the phi node (i.e., the
> > ssa name), not the computations on that it is based
>
> Is this something like what you had in mind ?
>
> gen_hash (stmt)
> {
>
> if (stmt == NULL)
> return 0;
>
> use_operand_p use_p;
> ssa_op_
On Tue, Oct 14, 2008 at 9:14 AM, Zdenek Dvorak <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hi,
>
>> >> >> So if the ssa_names are infact reused they won't be the same
>> >> >> computations.
>> >> >
>> >> > do you also check this for ssa names inside the loop (in your example,
>> >> > D.10_1?
>> >>
>> >> If we hav
Hi,
> >> >> So if the ssa_names are infact reused they won't be the same
> >> >> computations.
> >> >
> >> > do you also check this for ssa names inside the loop (in your example,
> >> > D.10_1?
> >>
> >> If we have to reinsert for a = phi (B) . We do the following checks.
> >>
> >> 1. If the edge
Hi,
>>
>> >> So if the ssa_names are infact reused they won't be the same
>> >> computations.
>> >
>> > do you also check this for ssa names inside the loop (in your example,
>> > D.10_1?
>>
>> If we have to reinsert for a = phi (B) . We do the following checks.
>>
>> 1. If the edge information in
Hi,
> [Sorry about dropping the ball on this. I've had some trouble with
> internet connectivity and was on vacation for a few days. ]
>
> On Thu, Oct 2, 2008 at 2:56 AM, Zdenek Dvorak <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> >> >> b) If any PHI node has count zero it can be inserted back
Hi Zdenek,
[Sorry about dropping the ball on this. I've had some trouble with
internet connectivity and was on vacation for a few days. ]
On Thu, Oct 2, 2008 at 2:56 AM, Zdenek Dvorak <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hi,
>
>> >> b) If any PHI node has count zero it can be inserted back and its
Hi,
> > I would disagree on that. Whether a final value replacement is
> > profitable or not largely depends on whether it makes further
> > optimization of the loop possible or not; this makes it difficult
> > to find a good cost model. I think undoing FVR is a good approach
> > to solve this p
Hi,
> >> b) If any PHI node has count zero it can be inserted back and its
> >> corresponding computations removed, iff the argument of the PHI
> >> node
> >> still exists as an SSA variable. This means that we can insert
> >> a_1 = PHI if D.10_1 still exists and hasnt b
On Wed, Oct 1, 2008 at 6:22 PM, Zdenek Dvorak <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hi,
>
>> > Based on the conversation in the thread at
>> > http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc/2008-03/msg00513.html , we've tried to get a
>> > pass trying to undo final value replacement going. The initial
>> > implementation was do
Hi Zdenek,
On Wed, Oct 1, 2008 at 5:19 PM, Zdenek Dvorak <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hi,
>
>> b) If any PHI node has count zero it can be inserted back and its
>> corresponding computations removed, iff the argument of the PHI node
>> still exists as an SSA variable. This mea
Hi,
> On Wed, Oct 1, 2008 at 3:59 PM, Richard Guenther
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > On Wed, Oct 1, 2008 at 3:22 PM, Ramana Radhakrishnan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > wrote:
> >> Hi ,
> >>
> >> Based on the conversation in the thread at
> >> http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc/2008-03/msg00513.html , we've t
Hi,
> > Based on the conversation in the thread at
> > http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc/2008-03/msg00513.html , we've tried to get a
> > pass trying to undo final value replacement going. The initial
> > implementation was done by Pranav Bhandarkar when he was employed at
> > Azingo as part of work spons
Hi,
> b) If any PHI node has count zero it can be inserted back and its
> corresponding computations removed, iff the argument of the PHI node
> still exists as an SSA variable. This means that we can insert
> a_1 = PHI if D.10_1 still exists and hasnt been removed by
>
On Wed, Oct 1, 2008 at 3:59 PM, Richard Guenther
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 1, 2008 at 3:22 PM, Ramana Radhakrishnan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote:
>> Hi ,
>>
>> Based on the conversation in the thread at
>> http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc/2008-03/msg00513.html , we've tried to get a
>> pass
On Wed, Oct 1, 2008 at 3:22 PM, Ramana Radhakrishnan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hi ,
>
> Based on the conversation in the thread at
> http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc/2008-03/msg00513.html , we've tried to get a
> pass trying to undo final value replacement going. The initial
> implementation was done b
Hi ,
Based on the conversation in the thread at
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc/2008-03/msg00513.html , we've tried to get a
pass trying to undo final value replacement going. The initial
implementation was done by Pranav Bhandarkar when he was employed at
Azingo as part of work sponsored by Icera Semic
17 matches
Mail list logo
