This is the mail archive of the gcc@gcc.gnu.org mailing list for the GCC project.
| Index Nav: | [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index] | |
|---|---|---|
| Message Nav: | [Date Prev] [Date Next] | [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] |
| Other format: | [Raw text] | |
Andrew MacLeod wrote:I think it came from Pastel compiler of Livermoore Laboratories and that stuff in Pastel compiler was written by Fred Chow who is a very good specialist in RA.
On Fri, 2007-08-17 at 12:01 -0400, Kenneth Zadeck wrote:this is gcc, get a life.
In any case IRA can not use UREC because UREC is needed before IRA calculates reg class info and the reg class info is needed for calculation of UREC. If you manage to use LIVE instead of UREC, it would permit to use LIVE also in IRA instead of LR. But I can not say can we use LIVE instead of UREC because I don't know the df-infrastructure well yet.
we should talk. I am avail today. i am leaving on vacation tomorrow for a week.
Even if this patch does not get in this round, you should consider it as
a starting point for building the interference graph for ira.
it does not use urec and a big part of the patch is just getting rid of
urec, It does a backwards scan using the live at bottom set as the
starting point for the scan.
This is the most accurate you can get so there really is no reason not
to use it since it is also no more expensive than any weaker technique.
It is the standard way of doing things. Out-Of-SSA has always used live range info from the bottom up for its conflict graph. I'm marginally suprised it is calculated any other way...
Andrew
bottom up is the way i was taught when i was a small child playing with
compilers with training wheels.
Gcc always seemed weird because you need reg_dead and reg_unused notes. Note that my patch does not use reg_dead or unused notes.
| Index Nav: | [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index] | |
|---|---|---|
| Message Nav: | [Date Prev] [Date Next] | [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] |