Displaying 3 results from an estimated 3 matches for "exit4".
Did you mean:
exit
2008 Jul 24
1
[LLVMdev] Irreducible CFG from tail duplication
....exit
foo.exit: ; preds = %continue.i
br i1 %b.i1, label %then.i2, label %continue.i3
then.i2: ; preds = %foo.exit, %then.i
store float 0.000000e+00, float* @x
ret void
continue.i3: ; preds = %foo.exit, %then.i
br label %foo.exit4
foo.exit4: ; preds = %continue.i3
ret void
}
On Thu, Jul 24, 2008 at 3:38 PM, Eli Friedman <eli.friedman at gmail.com> wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 24, 2008 at 2:00 PM, Mark Leone <markleone at gmail.com> wrote:
>> Is irreducibility a problem for existing LLVM pa...
2008 Jul 24
0
[LLVMdev] Irreducible CFG from tail duplication
On Thu, Jul 24, 2008 at 2:00 PM, Mark Leone <markleone at gmail.com> wrote:
> Is irreducibility a problem for existing LLVM passes?
There aren't any LLVM passes that expect a reducible CFG at the
moment; of course, some passes are more effective with reducible CFGs.
> It looks like
> there was once an open project for a pass to make irreducible graphs
> reducible. Was that
2008 Jul 24
3
[LLVMdev] Irreducible CFG from tail duplication
It seems that tail duplication can make a reducible CFG irreducible
(example below). Is that intentional? Are there other optimizations
that have that property?
Is irreducibility a problem for existing LLVM passes? It looks like
there was once an open project for a pass to make irreducible graphs
reducible. Was that ever implemented?
- Mark
; "opt -inline -tailduplicate" makes an