Hi Juzhe,
general remark upfront: Please add function-level comments for all
functions. This makes reading and reviewing much easier. I had to sweep
back and forth quite a bit.
> +
> +static int
> +get_last_live_range (const vec _ranges, tree var)
> +{
> + unsigned int ix;
> +
On 9/5/23 15:39, 钟居哲 wrote:
- Why don't we use the normal reverse postorder (or postorder) approach of
computing live ranges? Is that because we don't really need full global
live ranges?
Yes. We don't need global live ranges.
- Why can't we use existing code i.e. tree-ssa-live? I
oked quadratic to me but we're just iterating over
the program points of a BB.
Ok.
juzhe.zh...@rivai.ai
From: Robin Dapp
Date: 2023-09-06 05:02
To: Juzhe-Zhong; gcc-patches
CC: rdapp.gcc; kito.cheng; kito.cheng; jeffreyalaw
Subject: Re: [PATCH V2] RISC-V: Support Dynamic LMUL Cost model
Hi Juzhe,
Hi Juzhe,
I think the general approach makes sense and it doesn't need to be perfect
from the beginning as we can always iterate on it. Before continuing with a
more detailed review (hopefully tomorrow) some high-level questions upfront.
It would help to document some of these choices so it's
