This is the mail archive of the
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: implementation question
- From: Andrew Haley <aph at redhat dot com>
- To: Richard Biener <richard dot guenther at gmail dot com>, Daniel Gutson <daniel dot gutson at tallertechnologies dot com>
- Cc: gcc Mailing List <gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org>
- Date: Mon, 05 May 2014 10:28:07 +0100
- Subject: Re: implementation question
- Authentication-results: sourceware.org; auth=none
- References: <CAF5HaEWgup1evKX=CLB0in6Eqe=Fd2pBoPPjMhMY6b3sLPk_UA at mail dot gmail dot com> <CAFiYyc2kFMbsWdzK25iypbA1jHnr5j=r61PcpacPZ-4J4JpnBQ at mail dot gmail dot com>
On 05/05/2014 08:47 AM, Richard Biener wrote:
> It really depends on how "3x" should materialize in the end.
> How do you triplicate ops with side-effects? If you only
> triplicate ops without side-effects what is the sink that keeps
> the duplicated ops live?
The vote, surely. CSE would be absolutely determined to get rid of
all this redundant work. I guess it'd all have to be done very late
or we'd need a new node that CSE can't see through.
Would it be enough to mark all nodes that go into the vote as volatile?
I guess not: we wouldn't want to generate extra memory traffic.