Re: [tree-ssa] Any good sources of documentation?

[Diego Novillo <dnovillo at redhat dot com>]

On Tue, 2003-05-20 at 02:12, Marty Hauff wrote:

>   From your response I am assuming that tree-ssa does not parse the
> _whole_ program into one huge tree but rather parses each function
> individually.
>
Mainline and tree-ssa are the same codebase (modulo the SSA bits).  You
could also use the call-graph in tree-ssa.  One thing we don't keep are
the SSA forms for each function separately.  That's a design limitation
that we would eventually need to overcome for whole program analysis.

>   I understand that this strategy uses far less memory but could
> tree-ssa be modified to parse the whole program into a single tree and
> if so would it break it?
> 
Sure.  It would need changing quite a few things, though.  You need to
support several flowgraphs at the same time, for instance.  Right now,
the flowgraph uses global data structures and variables.  There are some
efforts underway to build infrastructure to support whole program
analysis, so GCC will eventually grow enough brains to do this.

> Specifically I am trying to use the compiler to give me information
> about what hardware resources would be most useful for a given
> application.
>
Hardware resources?  I'm not sure I follow.  There is nothing
hardware-related in trees.


Diego.