search for: d41302

...hich can make the code easier to maintain. Forth, the updater class can hold an optional PostDomTree and make its status synchronize with the corresponding DomTree (can use lazy updates until query happens) and use information from the DomTree to prune useless updates. After I read the comments on D41302[1], in which Dave(dmgreen) mentions there is a need to preserve the PostDomTree in the future. I am wondering whether we need to preserve a PostDomTree all the time in the new class? Moreover, as mentioned in the open projects page[2], the API should be able to specify which trees are actually bein...

...is possible to have some pending updates that > will eventually change DT, but do .dominates() queries on the outdated tree. > However, this problem exists even today to some extend (with DT and DDT) and > I don't think it's very serious. > >> After I read the comments on D41302[1], in which Dave(dmgreen) >> mentions there is a need to preserve the PostDomTree in the future. I >> am wondering whether we need to preserve a PostDomTree all the time in >> the new class? > > I think that at some point we realized that preserving PDT everywhere is > q...

...e codebase. In such cases it is possible to have some pending updates that will eventually change DT, but do .dominates() queries on the outdated tree. However, this problem exists even today to some extend (with DT and DDT) and I don't think it's very serious. After I read the comments on D41302[1], in which Dave(dmgreen) > mentions there is a need to preserve the PostDomTree in the future. I > am wondering whether we need to preserve a PostDomTree all the time in > the new class? I think that at some point we realized that preserving PDT everywhere is quite challenging with the...

...pdates that > > will eventually change DT, but do .dominates() queries on the outdated > tree. > > However, this problem exists even today to some extend (with DT and DDT) > and > > I don't think it's very serious. > > > >> After I read the comments on D41302[1], in which Dave(dmgreen) > >> mentions there is a need to preserve the PostDomTree in the future. I > >> am wondering whether we need to preserve a PostDomTree all the time in > >> the new class? > > > > I think that at some point we realized that preserving...

...lly change DT, but do .dominates() queries on the outdated >> > tree. >> > However, this problem exists even today to some extend (with DT and DDT) >> > and >> > I don't think it's very serious. >> > >> >> After I read the comments on D41302[1], in which Dave(dmgreen) >> >> mentions there is a need to preserve the PostDomTree in the future. I >> >> am wondering whether we need to preserve a PostDomTree all the time in >> >> the new class? >> > >> > I think that at some point we real...

...ke loop deletion and aggressive dead code elimination (ADCE). The problems the project mentions can be seen in various 'helper'/'utils' functions used by transforms. Take a look at these code reviews, especially the functions that can accept DT* and/or DDT*: https://reviews.llvm.org/D41302 https://reviews.llvm.org/D40146 https://reviews.llvm.org/D42804 I think that it's worth adding that a better API is only one part the project; the second, perhaps bigger and more fun, is to figure out how to prune redundant PostDomTree updates when we have a fully-updated DomTree available. F...

Hello, I’m an undergraduate student studying CS in the South China University of Technology. I have been using clang compiler and related tools since I started studying C++ and I would like to work on LLVM in this year’s GSoC. I am interested in “Implement a single updater class for Dominators”. [1] I have achieved a bronze medal in the 2017 ACM-ICPC Asia Xian Regional Contest [2] (being a