Displaying 4 results from an estimated 4 matches for "address_not_taken".
Did you mean:
address_no_taken
2013 Oct 30
0
[LLVMdev] [Propose] Add address-taken bit to GlobalVariable for disambiguation purpose
...steps:
Okay, sounds good. IIRC, GlobalsModRef currently (also) determines whether or not a global has its address taken. It might make sense to unify that logic with what you're proposing for GlobalOpt, and it seems like it would definitely make sense to let GlobalsModRef take advantage of the address_not_taken bit.
Also, as a general note, I don't see why any of this should be LTO-specific. For variables with local (internal) linkage, we can do the analysis on a per-module basis, and I don't understand why we currently don't.
Thanks again,
Hal
>
> --------------------------
>...
2013 Oct 30
2
[LLVMdev] [Propose] Add address-taken bit to GlobalVariable for disambiguation purpose
...s:
> Okay, sounds good. IIRC, GlobalsModRef currently (also) determines whether or not a global has its address taken. It might make sense to unify that logic with what you're proposing for GlobalOpt, and it seems like it would definitely make sense to let GlobalsModRef take advantage of the address_not_taken bit.
I don't read ModRef carefully. I think it make some sense to factor out
the addr-taken analysis. Such that
other pass can take advantage of it.
>
> Also, as a general note, I don't see why any of this should be LTO-specific. For variables with local (internal) linkage, we can d...
2013 Oct 30
3
[LLVMdev] [Propose] Add address-taken bit to GlobalVariable for disambiguation purpose
Hi, Hal:
Thank you for your feedback, see following inline comment
Thanks
On 10/29/13 5:02 PM, Hal Finkel wrote:
> ----- Original Message -----
>> Hi, There:
>>
>> I'd like to add bit, called "addr_not_taken", to GlobalVariable in
>> order to
>> indicate if a GlobalVariable doesn't has its address taken or not.
>>
>> 1.The
2013 Oct 30
0
[LLVMdev] [Propose] Add address-taken bit to GlobalVariable for disambiguation purpose
On Oct 29, 2013, at 7:11 PM, Shuxin Yang <shuxin.llvm at gmail.com> wrote:
>> Also, as a general note, I don't see why any of this should be LTO-specific. For variables with local (internal) linkage, we can do the analysis on a per-module basis, and I don't understand why we currently don't.
>>
>> Thanks again,
>> Hal
>>
>>
> You can