This is the mail archive of the
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: [GSoC] questions about graphite_clast_to_gimple.c
- From: Roman Gareev <gareevroman at gmail dot com>
- To: Tobias Grosser <tobias at grosser dot es>
- Cc: Mircea Namolaru <mircea dot namolaru at inria dot fr>, gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org
- Date: Tue, 6 May 2014 01:11:21 +0600
- Subject: Re: [GSoC] questions about graphite_clast_to_gimple.c
- Authentication-results: sourceware.org; auth=none
- References: <CABGF_gfsbEmL7FODBF9dmLMFFtRbpqBk3Nm54P9e0WOYS1bGSw at mail dot gmail dot com> <535DF1DE dot 1040900 at grosser dot es>
thank you for your reply! I have questions about types. Could you
please answer them?
Questions related to âtype_for_intervalâ:
1. What happens in these lines?
int precision = MAX (mpz_sizeinbase (bound_one, 2),
mpz_sizeinbase (bound_two, 2));
if (precision > BITS_PER_WORD)
gloog_error = true;
Do we try to count maximum number of value bits in bound_one and
bound_two? Why can't it be greater than BITS_PER_WORD?
2. Why do we want to generate signed types as much as possible?
3. Why do we always have enough precision in case of precision <
Questions related to âclast_to_gcc_expressionâ:
4. What is the idea behind this code?
if (POINTER_TYPE_P (TREE_TYPE (name)) != POINTER_TYPE_P (type))
name = convert_to_ptrofftype (name);
5. Why do we check POINTER_TYPE_P(type)? (âtypeâ has tree type and the
manual says that a tree is a pointer type)
Questions related to âmax_precision_typeâ:
6. Why is type1, for example, is the maximal precision type in case of
truth of POINTER_TYPE_P (type1)?
7. Why do we have enough precision for p2 in case of p1 > p2 and signed type1?
8. Why do we always build signed integer type in the line: âtype =
build_nonstandard_integer_type (precision, false);â?
Questions related to âtype_for_clast_redâ:
9. Why do we use this code in case of clast_red_sum?
value_min (m1, bound_one, bound_two);
value_min (m2, b1, b2);
mpz_add (bound_one, m1, m2);
Can bound_one be greater then bound_two? (We also consider two cases
10. Why do we assume that new bounds are min(bound_one, bound_two) and
min(b1, b2) in case of clast_red_min?
Cheers, Roman Gareev