search for: bitcastconstantexpr

...an be used as the default instead of "Disjoint". For Unknown, any pass can do the conservative thing. Lastly, I'm still not so sure if InstCombine is the right place for this simplification. This needs some more thought, but currently it is a problem that instcombine does not process BitCastConstantExprs. I might end up writing a seperate pass for just this. So again, suggestions welcome. Gr. Matthijs -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: addrspaces.diff Type: text/x-diff Size: 9792 bytes Desc: not available URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail...

...nt shouldn't expect correct answers from coming out of the compiler. > > > Lastly, I'm still not so sure if InstCombine is the right place for > this > simplification. This needs some more thought, but currently it is a > problem > that instcombine does not process BitCastConstantExprs. I might end > up writing > a seperate pass for just this. > I'm not sure either. At some level, what we want is to propagate the most precise address space (or restrict) information to its use. This means that ideally we would want to be able to handle copies of the value s...

...ould make sure that this info is correct anyway. So, no need for an unknown default? >> Lastly, I'm still not so sure if InstCombine is the right place for this >> simplification. This needs some more thought, but currently it is a problem >> that instcombine does not process BitCastConstantExprs. I might end up >> writing a seperate pass for just this. > > I'm not sure either. At some level, what we want is to propagate the most > precise address space (or restrict) information to its use. Exactly. > This means that ideally we would want to be able to handle copies...

Hi Matthijs, > >>> Specifically, I would like instcombining to be able to use this >>> info to >>> remove useless bitcasts. Also, this information is useful for >>> clang to >>> know when inserting an implicit cast makes sense and when it >>> would be an >>> error. >> Clang should just reject implicit casts in *any*

...nknown default? > That is my feeling. >>> Lastly, I'm still not so sure if InstCombine is the right place >>> for this >>> simplification. This needs some more thought, but currently it is >>> a problem >>> that instcombine does not process BitCastConstantExprs. I might >>> end up >>> writing a seperate pass for just this. >> >> I'm not sure either. At some level, what we want is to propagate >> the most >> precise address space (or restrict) information to its use. > Exactly. > >> This means...

Hi all, I've been a tad busy in the last few weeks, but I don't think this issue is settled yet. > > the relations between each address space (equivalent, disjoint, subset/ > > superset). > > Any thoughts on that? Should they also belong in TargetData? > Only if absolutely required, see below. Is there any other place they would fit in better? What piece of below