llvm dev - Mar 2016 - Existing studies on the benefits of pointer analysis

On 21 March 2016 at 18:59, Daniel Berlin <dberlin at dberlin.org>
wrote:
> Which is why i've never mentioned it or used it in the community ;)
Makes sense. :)

> I would rather see someone spend their time getting SCEV-AA on by default
or
> CFL-AA on by default than doing another evaluation.
But those may not be simple enough for a GSOC, that's why I mentioned it.

The analysis could not only get us a birds view of the problem ahead,
but also introduce new developers to AA, which would make their future
work on SCEV-AA or CFL-AA easier. Kind of a teaching tool to get more
AA-savvy people.

cheers,
--renato

On Mon, Mar 21, 2016 at 12:05 PM, Renato Golin <renato.golin at
linaro.org>
wrote:
> On 21 March 2016 at 18:59, Daniel Berlin <dberlin at dberlin.org>
wrote:
> > Which is why i've never mentioned it or used it in the community
;)
>
> Makes sense. :)
>
>
> > I would rather see someone spend their time getting SCEV-AA on by
> default or
> > CFL-AA on by default than doing another evaluation.
>
> But those may not be simple enough for a GSOC, that's why I mentioned
it.
>
>
CFL-AA should just be fixing performance regressions, and maybe a little
bug fixing, which is hopefully easy enough.  It's already fast enough as a
pass.

SCEV-AA would be harder (must make SCEV-AA faster).

The analysis could not only get us a birds view of the problem
ahead,
> but also introduce new developers to AA, which would make their future
> work on SCEV-AA or CFL-AA easier. Kind of a teaching tool to get more
> AA-savvy people.
>
Sure.
>
> cheers,
> --renato
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL:
<http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/attachments/20160321/d1ee289f/attachment.html>

----- Original Message -----
> From: "Daniel Berlin via llvm-dev" <llvm-dev at
lists.llvm.org>
> To: "Renato Golin" <renato.golin at linaro.org>,
"George Burgess IV"
> <george.burgess.iv at gmail.com>
> Cc: "llvm-dev" <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org>, "Jia
Chen"
> <jchen at cs.utexas.edu>
> Sent: Monday, March 21, 2016 2:07:44 PM
> Subject: Re: [llvm-dev] Existing studies on the benefits of pointer
> analysis
> On Mon, Mar 21, 2016 at 12:05 PM, Renato Golin <
> renato.golin at linaro.org > wrote:
> > On 21 March 2016 at 18:59, Daniel Berlin < dberlin at dberlin.org
>
> > wrote:
> 
> > > Which is why i've never mentioned it or used it in the
community
> > > ;)
> 
> > Makes sense. :)
> 
> > > I would rather see someone spend their time getting SCEV-AA on by
> > > default or
> 
> > > CFL-AA on by default than doing another evaluation.
> 
> > But those may not be simple enough for a GSOC, that's why I
> > mentioned
> > it.
> 
> CFL-AA should just be fixing performance regressions, and maybe a
> little bug fixing, which is hopefully easy enough. It's already fast
> enough as a pass.
My understanding from George is that there are self-hosting miscompiles if you
disable all AA except for CFL-AA. This is what is preventing us from enabling it
by default. George, is that right?

-Hal 
> SCEV-AA would be harder (must make SCEV-AA faster).
> > The analysis could not only get us a birds view of the problem
> > ahead,
> 
> > but also introduce new developers to AA, which would make their
> > future
> 
> > work on SCEV-AA or CFL-AA easier. Kind of a teaching tool to get
> > more
> 
> > AA-savvy people.
> 
> Sure.
> > cheers,
> 
> > --renato
> 
> _______________________________________________
> LLVM Developers mailing list
> llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org
> http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-dev
-- 

Hal Finkel 
Assistant Computational Scientist 
Leadership Computing Facility 
Argonne National Laboratory 
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL:
<http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/attachments/20160321/3ec1aa34/attachment.html>