search for: bilardi

...inator trees, with one rooted at each exit node. The problem this can cause is that, by nature, these trees omit some nodes which are not post-dominated by any one exit. This invalidates analyses which build on a traversal of the post-dominator tree. (In my case, I'm implementing Pingali & Bilardi's optimal control dependence algorithms: http://doi.acm.org/10.1145/256167.256217.) Consider, for example, a simple function with a single branch and two exits: define i32 @f(i32 %X) { entry: %0 = icmp eq i32 %X, 0 br i1 %0, label %exit1, label %exit2 exit1: ret i32...

I think you can also avoid the RDF computation using a more directed form of control dependence testing such as described in Keshav Pingali and Gianfranco Bilardi. 1997. Optimal control dependence computation and the Roman chariots problem. ACM Trans. Program. Lang. Syst. 19, 3 (May 1997), 462-491. DOI=http://dx.doi.org/10.1145/256167.256217 However one challenge seems to be fixing the SSA graph after deleting essentially arbitrary connected regions of the...

...ooted at each exit node. The problem this can cause is that, by > nature, these trees omit some nodes which are not post-dominated by > any one exit. This invalidates analyses which build on a traversal of > the post-dominator tree. > > (In my case, I'm implementing Pingali & Bilardi's optimal control > dependence algorithms: http://doi.acm.org/10.1145/256167.256217.) > > Consider, for example, a simple function with a single branch and two > exits: > > define i32 @f(i32 %X) { > entry: > %0 = icmp eq i32 %X, 0 > br i1 %0, label %exit...

...s not slower in GCC than dce On Fri, Jan 29, 2016, 8:31 PM David Callahan <dcallahan at fb.com<mailto:dcallahan at fb.com>> wrote: I think you can also avoid the RDF computation using a more directed form of control dependence testing such as described in Keshav Pingali and Gianfranco Bilardi. 1997. Optimal control dependence computation and the Roman chariots problem. ACM Trans. Program. Lang. Syst. 19, 3 (May 1997), 462-491. DOI=http://dx.doi.org/10.1145/256167.256217<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__dx.doi.org_10.1145_256167.256217&d=CwMFaQ&c=5VD0RTtNlTh...

...ses. Cd-dce is not slower in GCC than dce On Fri, Jan 29, 2016, 8:31 PM David Callahan <dcallahan at fb.com> wrote: > I think you can also avoid the RDF computation using a more directed form > of control dependence testing such as described in > > Keshav Pingali and Gianfranco Bilardi. 1997. Optimal control dependence > computation and the Roman chariots problem. ACM Trans. Program. Lang. Syst. > 19, 3 (May 1997), 462-491. DOI=http://dx.doi.org/10.1145/256167.256217 > > However one challenge seems to be fixing the SSA graph after deleting > essentially arbitrary c...

...s not slower in GCC than dce On Fri, Jan 29, 2016, 8:31 PM David Callahan <dcallahan at fb.com<mailto:dcallahan at fb.com>> wrote: I think you can also avoid the RDF computation using a more directed form of control dependence testing such as described in Keshav Pingali and Gianfranco Bilardi. 1997. Optimal control dependence computation and the Roman chariots problem. ACM Trans. Program. Lang. Syst. 19, 3 (May 1997), 462-491. DOI=http://dx.doi.org/10.1145/256167.256217<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__dx.doi.org_10.1145_256167.256217&d=CwMFaQ&c=5VD0RTtNlTh...

On Sat, Jan 7, 2012 at 12:14 AM, Cameron Zwarich <zwarich at apple.com> wrote: > On Jan 6, 2012, at 8:27 PM, Daniel Berlin wrote: > > Note: GCC takes exactly the same approach as LLVM here, for exactly > the reason chris specifies. > In fact, until we started local SSA updating (which is now many years > ago, but ...), dominance frontier calculation for ssa updating was in

On Thu, Jan 28, 2016 at 10:09 PM, Hal Finkel <hfinkel at anl.gov> wrote: > > ------------------------------ > > *From: *"David Callahan via llvm-dev" <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> > *To: *"Daniel Berlin" <dberlin at dberlin.org>, "LLVM Dev Mailing list" < > llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> > *Sent: *Thursday, January 28, 2016