This is the mail archive of the
gcc@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: [tree-ssa] vectorizer related issues
- From: Devang Patel <dpatel at apple dot com>
- To: Diego Novillo <dnovillo at redhat dot com>
- Cc: Dorit Naishlos <DORIT at il dot ibm dot com>, "gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org" <gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org>
- Date: Thu, 8 Jan 2004 15:49:43 -0800
- Subject: Re: [tree-ssa] vectorizer related issues
- References: <OF84E7BD0B.816A0013-ONC2256DFE.002C8227-C2256DFE.0047E4E4@il.ibm.com> <1073580125.3165.93.camel@frodo.toronto.redhat.com>
On Jan 8, 2004, at 8:42 AM, Diego Novillo wrote:
On Tue, 2003-12-16 at 08:05, Dorit Naishlos wrote:
(2) virtual defs/uses.
This issue goes back to an action item on the tree-ssa todo
list:
"SSA information for arrays
The existing implementation treats arrays as an opaque object. A
definition to an array location is treated as a definition for the
whole
array".
Q2.1: Is anyone planning to address this issue? (so that the
vdefs/vuses of
arrays will be connected only to may/must aliased references?)
It's in my long term todo list but I haven't thought about it much.
One
vague idea was to try out the various SSA-for-arrays papers that are
floating about. I don't know how they compare to the traditional
dependency analysis, though.
Recently I spent some time understanding
"Array SSA form and its use in Parallelization
- Kathleen Knobe, Vivek Sarkar
(POPL 98)"
Any thoughts about their approach? What other papers you've in mind?
--
Devang