On Fri, Jun 23, 2017 at 11:48 AM, Richard Biener
wrote:
> On Fri, Jun 23, 2017 at 12:19 PM, Bin.Cheng wrote:
>> On Mon, Jun 19, 2017 at 4:20 PM, Richard Biener
>> wrote:
>>> On Mon, Jun 19, 2017 at 3:40 PM, Bin.Cheng
On Fri, Jun 23, 2017 at 12:19 PM, Bin.Cheng wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 19, 2017 at 4:20 PM, Richard Biener
> wrote:
>> On Mon, Jun 19, 2017 at 3:40 PM, Bin.Cheng wrote:
>>> On Wed, Jun 14, 2017 at 2:54 PM, Richard Biener
>>>
On Mon, Jun 19, 2017 at 4:20 PM, Richard Biener
wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 19, 2017 at 3:40 PM, Bin.Cheng wrote:
>> On Wed, Jun 14, 2017 at 2:54 PM, Richard Biener
>> wrote:
>>> On Mon, Jun 12, 2017 at 7:03 PM, Bin Cheng
On Mon, Jun 19, 2017 at 3:40 PM, Bin.Cheng wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 14, 2017 at 2:54 PM, Richard Biener
> wrote:
>> On Mon, Jun 12, 2017 at 7:03 PM, Bin Cheng wrote:
>>> Hi,
>>> Current primitive cost model merges partitions with
On Wed, Jun 14, 2017 at 2:54 PM, Richard Biener
wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 12, 2017 at 7:03 PM, Bin Cheng wrote:
>> Hi,
>> Current primitive cost model merges partitions with data references sharing
>> the same
>> base address. I believe it's designed
On Wed, Jun 14, 2017 at 2:54 PM, Richard Biener
wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 12, 2017 at 7:03 PM, Bin Cheng wrote:
>> Hi,
>> Current primitive cost model merges partitions with data references sharing
>> the same
>> base address. I believe it's designed
On Mon, Jun 12, 2017 at 7:03 PM, Bin Cheng wrote:
> Hi,
> Current primitive cost model merges partitions with data references sharing
> the same
> base address. I believe it's designed to maximize data reuse in
> distribution, but
> that should be done by dedicated data
Hi,
Current primitive cost model merges partitions with data references sharing the
same
base address. I believe it's designed to maximize data reuse in distribution,
but
that should be done by dedicated data reusing algorithm. At this stage of
merging,
we should be conservative and only