On May 27, 2007, at 9:28 AM, David Greene wrote:
> Evan Cheng wrote:
>> That's fine. Please check in what you have now after you've merged in
>> the recent changes.
>
> I don't have write access to the repository. :-/ I'd gladly do the
> update merge and commit if someone wants to grant me acce
Evan Cheng wrote:
> That's fine. Please check in what you have now after you've merged in
> the recent changes.
I don't have write access to the repository. :-/ I'd gladly do the
update merge and commit if someone wants to grant me access.
Thanks for getting this in. As soon as I wrap up my
That's fine. Please check in what you have now after you've merged in
the recent changes.
Thanks,
Evan
On May 23, 2007, at 11:52 AM, David Greene wrote:
> Chris Lattner wrote:
>
>> What did Evan ask for? Are you referring to the addrequired bit?
>
> Not sure what you mean by "addrequired bit.
Chris Lattner wrote:
> What did Evan ask for? Are you referring to the addrequired bit?
Not sure what you mean by "addrequired bit."
If I understand correctly, Evan wants me to create an infrastructure
to allow pluggable coalescers.
I'd rather not do that right now as I've got a ton of other t
On May 16, 2007, at 1:01 PM, David Greene wrote:
> Chris Lattner wrote:
>
>>> I think your suggestion of createRegisterCoalescer() is the right
>>> solution in the long run. My goal here was to submit the first
>>> phase
>>> of a larger refactoring effort that separated coalescing from
>>> liv
Chris Lattner wrote:
>> I think your suggestion of createRegisterCoalescer() is the right
>> solution in the long run. My goal here was to submit the first phase
>> of a larger refactoring effort that separated coalescing from
>> live interval analysis but tried not to do anything else dramatic.
On May 9, 2007, at 4:54 PM, David A. Greene wrote:
> Evan Cheng wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> The patch seems pretty safe to me. The only thing I am not sure
>> about is:
>
> [snip]
>
>> It's not clear to me if this is the right way to model this pass.
>> After
>> all, this is not an analysis pass. Per
Unless Chris has any comments, please fix the createRegisterCoalescer
() issue and then check it in (or send the patch).
I am fixing a coalescer bug at this point. Please merge in my changes
if I happen to get that in before you do.
Thanks,
Evan
On May 9, 2007, at 4:54 PM, David A. Greene wr
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Evan Cheng wrote:
> Hi,
>
> The patch seems pretty safe to me. The only thing I am not sure about is:
[snip]
> It's not clear to me if this is the right way to model this pass. After
> all, this is not an analysis pass. Perhaps the right thing to do
Sorry, I haven't had a chance to review this. I'll read it today or
tomorrow.
Evan
On May 8, 2007, at 7:41 AM, David Greene wrote:
> David A. Greene wrote:
>> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
>> Hash: SHA1
>>
>> This patch splits LiveIntervalAnalysis into separate live interval
>> analysis an
David A. Greene wrote:
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA1
>
> This patch splits LiveIntervalAnalysis into separate live interval
> analysis and register coalescing phases to facilitate development
> of new register allocators and coalescing schemes.
>
> It passes all tests that do
11 matches
Mail list logo
