This is the mail archive of the
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: [tree-ssa] More aliasing fixes
- From: Diego Novillo <dnovillo at redhat dot com>
- To: Jeff Law <law at redhat dot com>
- Cc: Jan Hubicka <jh at suse dot cz>, Jan Hubicka <hubicka at ucw dot cz>, "gcc-patches at gcc dot gnu dot org" <gcc-patches at gcc dot gnu dot org>
- Date: Thu, 08 Jan 2004 12:25:58 -0500
- Subject: Re: [tree-ssa] More aliasing fixes
- Organization: Red Hat Canada
- References: <200312181505.hBIF5jLY015862@speedy.slc.redhat.com>
On Thu, 2003-12-18 at 10:05, firstname.lastname@example.org wrote:
> In message <email@example.com>, Diego Novillo w
> >On Thu, 2003-12-18 at 09:31, firstname.lastname@example.org wrote:
> >> He's referring to the SGI paper which talks about how to handle aliasing
> >> and memory operands in SSA form.
> >Dunno about a paper, but I do have a tutorial the ORC team presented in
> I'm referring to:
> F. C. Chow, S. Chan, S.-M. Liu, R. Lo, and M. Streich, ``Effective
> Representation of Aliases and Indirect Memory Operations in SSA Form
Ah, OK. Yes, it's essentially the same info that they presented in
PACT. The key differences with our approach are:
- We do not allow mixing real and virtual operands. So, if we wanted to
do zero-versioning we would not need to jump through hoops like they do.
- We do not have multi-level pointers, so we just need to have a single
virtual variable (memory tag) per pointer.
- We don't build the hashed SSA form. I haven't really looked into it
in detail, though nothing in particular stood out when I read what they