This is the mail archive of the 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]

Re: birthpoints in rtl.

On 2/28/08 8:03 AM, Kenneth Zadeck wrote:

The big difference between what i am proposing with birthpoints and a
full blown ssa implementation is that i plan to do no rewriting since
there are no operands of the phis to support this.

You don't need to do a rewriting SSA implementation to have PHI nodes with operands. FUD chains fully support PHI nodes with operands.

I believe that what i am proposing is actually currently called (or at
least related to) factored use def chains, but i need to read up on the
literature to see if they really are the same.

Yes, they are. FUD chains are what I initially used on GIMPLE, but they do not allow overlapping live ranges for different SSA names of the same symbol, so for GIMPLE registers I implemented the basic rewriting form and for memory symbols I implemented FUD chains (the SSA web over VDEF/VUSEs are FUD chains).

If we are not going to use a rewriting SSA form, I believe that the original problems we had with RTL-SSA can be avoided.


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]