search for: forgetvalu

...state that your pass preserves ScalarEvolution. In this case all > analysis results are by default preserved and it is your job to > invalidate the scalar evolution for the loops/values where it needs to > be recalculated. > > The relevant functions are > > ScalarEvolution::forgetValue(Value *) Since the vectorization pass is currently just a basic-block pass, I think that I should need only forgetValue, right? I suppose that I would call that on all of the values that are fused. Also, using getPointerBase to get the base pointer seems simple enough, but how should I use getMi...

...ave a similar capability? You can state that your pass preserves ScalarEvolution. In this case all analysis results are by default preserved and it is your job to invalidate the scalar evolution for the loops/values where it needs to be recalculated. The relevant functions are ScalarEvolution::forgetValue(Value *) ScalarEvolution::forgetLoop(Loop *) Cheers Tobi

...serves ScalarEvolution. In this >> case all analysis results are by default preserved and it is your >> job to invalidate the scalar evolution for the loops/values where >> it needs to be recalculated. >> >> The relevant functions are >> >> ScalarEvolution::forgetValue(Value *) > > Since the vectorization pass is currently just a basic-block pass, I > think that I should need only forgetValue, right? I suppose that I > would call that on all of the values that are fused. You call it on all the values/instructions that are removed and for those where...

On Thu, 2011-11-10 at 23:07 +0100, Tobias Grosser wrote: > On 11/08/2011 11:29 PM, Hal Finkel wrote: > > On Tue, 2011-11-08 at 20:24 +0100, Tobias Grosser wrote: > >> On 11/08/2011 03:36 PM, Hal Finkel wrote: > >>> On Tue, 2011-11-08 at 12:12 +0100, Tobias Grosser wrote: > >>>> On 11/08/2011 11:45 AM, Hal Finkel wrote: > > [A lot of performance

...; >> case all analysis results are by default preserved and it is your > >> job to invalidate the scalar evolution for the loops/values where > >> it needs to be recalculated. > >> > >> The relevant functions are > >> > >> ScalarEvolution::forgetValue(Value *) > > > > Since the vectorization pass is currently just a basic-block pass, I > > think that I should need only forgetValue, right? I suppose that I > > would call that on all of the values that are fused. > > You call it on all the values/instructions that a...

...esults are by default preserved and it is your > > >> job to invalidate the scalar evolution for the loops/values where > > >> it needs to be recalculated. > > >> > > >> The relevant functions are > > >> > > >> ScalarEvolution::forgetValue(Value *) > > > > > > Since the vectorization pass is currently just a basic-block pass, I > > > think that I should need only forgetValue, right? I suppose that I > > > would call that on all of the values that are fused. > > > > You call it on all...

On 11/08/2011 11:29 PM, Hal Finkel wrote: > On Tue, 2011-11-08 at 20:24 +0100, Tobias Grosser wrote: >> On 11/08/2011 03:36 PM, Hal Finkel wrote: >>> On Tue, 2011-11-08 at 12:12 +0100, Tobias Grosser wrote: >>>> On 11/08/2011 11:45 AM, Hal Finkel wrote: [A lot of performance results skipped] OK. As expected part of the speedup is because of unrolling, however it

...nd)); > + } No braces. > + for (std::vector<ValuePair>::iterator A = NewSetMembers.begin(), > + AE = NewSetMembers.end(); A != AE; ++A) { Indentation. > + LoadMoveSet.insert(*A); > + } No braces. > + } > + > + SE.forgetValue(I); > + SE.forgetValue(J); > + I->eraseFromParent(); > + J->eraseFromParent(); > + } > + > + DEBUG(dbgs()<< "BBV: final: \n"<< BB<< "\n"); > + } > +} > --- /dev/null > +++ b/test/Transforms/BBVector...

...r (std::vector<ValuePair>::iterator A = NewSetMembers.begin(), > > + AE = NewSetMembers.end(); A != AE; ++A) { > Indentation. > > > + LoadMoveSet.insert(*A); > > + } > No braces. > > > + } > > + > > + SE.forgetValue(I); > > + SE.forgetValue(J); > > + I->eraseFromParent(); > > + J->eraseFromParent(); > > + } > > + > > + DEBUG(dbgs()<< "BBV: final: \n"<< BB<< "\n"); > > + } > > +} > > >...

On Mon, 2011-11-21 at 21:22 -0600, Hal Finkel wrote: > On Mon, 2011-11-21 at 11:55 -0600, Hal Finkel wrote: > > Tobias, > > > > I've attached an updated patch. It contains a few bug fixes and many > > (refactoring and coding-convention) changes inspired by your comments. > > > > I'm currently trying to fix the bug responsible for causing a compile

...r (std::vector<ValuePair>::iterator A = NewSetMembers.begin(), > > + AE = NewSetMembers.end(); A != AE; ++A) { > Indentation. > > > + LoadMoveSet.insert(*A); > > + } > No braces. > > > + } > > + > > + SE.forgetValue(I); > > + SE.forgetValue(J); > > + I->eraseFromParent(); > > + J->eraseFromParent(); > > + } > > + > > + DEBUG(dbgs()<< "BBV: final: \n"<< BB<< "\n"); > > + } > > +} > > >...

On Mon, 2011-11-21 at 11:55 -0600, Hal Finkel wrote: > Tobias, > > I've attached an updated patch. It contains a few bug fixes and many > (refactoring and coding-convention) changes inspired by your comments. > > I'm currently trying to fix the bug responsible for causing a compile > failure when compiling >