Displaying 3 results from an estimated 3 matches for "d16483".
Did you mean:
16483
2016 Jan 22
2
Allowing virtual registers after register allocation
...'s still a little bit of code in the FI elimination code that takes CSR spilling into account. But I do think it is an improvement, and I'd be interested in feedback. This patch could be ready to land if people are happy with the design.
>>
>> The other (http://reviews.llvm.org/D16483 <http://reviews.llvm.org/D16483> )is the aforementioned prototype for requiring MachineFunctionPasses to opt-in to supporting virtual registers. It's only done for WebAssembly and X86 so far as a proof of concept. The interesting bit to look at is the way it's implemented (right now i...
2016 Jan 22
2
Allowing virtual registers after register allocation
...be null, and there's still a little bit of
code in the FI elimination code that takes CSR spilling into account. But I
do think it is an improvement, and I'd be interested in feedback. This
patch could be ready to land if people are happy with the design.
The other (http://reviews.llvm.org/D16483 )is the aforementioned prototype
for requiring MachineFunctionPasses to opt-in to supporting virtual
registers. It's only done for WebAssembly and X86 so far as a proof of
concept. The interesting bit to look at is the way it's implemented (right
now it's just a virtual method that'...
2016 Jan 13
2
Allowing virtual registers after register allocation
We had some additional discussion on this. There is a lot of concern
generally about post-RA passes which do not expect to have to handle
virtual registers; specifically if they unexpectedly start seeing virtual
registers, or if they work today but start making assumptions in the
future. We discussed considering a mechanism that would require
MachineFunctionPasses to "opt-in" and declare