This is the mail archive of the
gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: Experimental post-reload life analysis
- To: Richard Henderson <rth at cygnus dot com>
- Subject: Re: Experimental post-reload life analysis
- From: Jeffrey A Law <law at cygnus dot com>
- Date: Thu, 08 Oct 1998 12:02:45 -0600
- cc: Bernd Schmidt <crux at Pool dot Informatik dot RWTH-Aachen dot DE>, egcs-patches at cygnus dot com
- Reply-To: law at cygnus dot com
In message <19981008105518.F18115@dot.cygnus.com>you write:
> On Thu, Oct 08, 1998 at 01:36:55PM +0200, Bernd Schmidt wrote:
> > >From a code duplication standpoint you are probably right. However, flo
> w.c
> > does a lot more stuff than we need, and I don't want to go cluttering it
> up
> > with "if (! reload_completed)".
>
> Certainly not. However, if life_analysis was broken up to try to do
> less all at once, and all in the same function, that might help. And
> it would help other passes as well.
Precisely. Just because life_analysis is one or two big functions that do a
lot of things now doesn't mean that's we have to keep it that way.
> > Also, the patch I sent is a quite a bit more efficient: instead of calling
> > a function like propagate_block which has to walk a whole list of insns,
> > it implements the propagation of life info through the function with some
> > simple operations on HARD_REG_SETs.
>
> Indeed, I'd like to see flow do the same thing with regsets.
And there's nothing that says we couldn't do the same in flow.
jeff