Displaying 3 results from an estimated 3 matches for "d27366".
2017 Nov 16
2
Less aggressive on the first allocation of CSR if detecting an early exit
...e already mentioned it in one of the review, but I
> believe it would be better to differentiate when we want to use a CSR
> to avoid spilling or to avoid splitting. CSR instead of spilling is
> good, CSR instead of splitting, not so good :).
About this, I can see your previous comment in D27366 (I copied it
below) :
Also, that's possible that the right fix/simple fix is to have one
CSRCost for split and one for spill.
Indeed, IIRC, right now the returned cost for both spilling and
splitting is going to be the sum of the frequencies where the
split/spill happen and given the...
2017 Nov 17
2
Less aggressive on the first allocation of CSR if detecting an early exit
...eve it would be better to differentiate when we want to use a
>>> CSR
>>> to avoid spilling or to avoid splitting. CSR instead of spilling
>>> is
>>> good, CSR instead of splitting, not so good :).
>>
>> About this, I can see your previous comment in D27366 (I copied it
>> below) :
>> Also, that's possible that the right fix/simple fix is to have one
>> CSRCost for split and one for spill.
>> Indeed, IIRC, right now the returned cost for both spilling and
>> splitting is going to be the sum of the frequencies where th...
2017 Nov 10
2
Less aggressive on the first allocation of CSR if detecting an early exit
On 2017-11-10 07:47, Nemanja Ivanovic wrote:
> One thing I thought about doing a while back and never really wrote a
> POC for is the following:
> - Make FirstCSRCost a property of the MachineBasicBlock (or create a
> map of MBB* -> FirstCSRCost)
>
> - Implement a pre-RA pass that will populate the map as follows:
>
> - Identify all blocks with calls
>
> -