search for: l00282

Displaying 4 results from an estimated 4 matches for "l00282".

Did you mean: l00082
2015 May 05
1
[LLVMdev] Naryreassociate vs reassociate
Hi Daniel, I presume you mean, instead of assigning function arguments distinct ranks ( http://llvm.org/docs/doxygen/html/Reassociate_8cpp_source.html#l00282), we should group function arguments in favor of existing pairings. You are not suggesting discarding the entire ranking system, right? I'll look into how that works on my benchmarks. AFAIK, we encountered some cases that seem beyond the fix you suggested. These cases involve constants, and I...
2015 May 04
2
[LLVMdev] Naryreassociate vs reassociate
Whoops, forgot llvmdev On Mon, May 4, 2015 at 4:12 PM, Daniel Berlin <dberlin at dberlin.org> wrote: > So i started by looking at naryreassociate, whose pass > description/reason listed for doing it is actually describes bug in > reassociate, and discovered that, in fact, reassociate seems broken, > and should be doing the right thing on most of your testcases. > >
2015 May 05
1
[LLVMdev] Naryreassociate vs reassociate
...in.org> wrote: > On Tue, May 5, 2015 at 10:20 AM, Jingyue Wu <jingyue at google.com> wrote: > > Hi Daniel, > > > > I presume you mean, instead of assigning function arguments distinct > ranks > > (http://llvm.org/docs/doxygen/html/Reassociate_8cpp_source.html#l00282), > we > > should group function arguments in favor of existing pairings. > > Existing = pairings reassociate already chose before > *not* > existing = pairings that already exist in the source IR > > Given that, we should probably group everything in favor of existing &g...
2015 May 05
1
[LLVMdev] Naryreassociate vs reassociate
On Tue, May 5, 2015 at 10:20 AM, Jingyue Wu <jingyue at google.com> wrote: > Hi Daniel, > > I presume you mean, instead of assigning function arguments distinct ranks > (http://llvm.org/docs/doxygen/html/Reassociate_8cpp_source.html#l00282), we > should group function arguments in favor of existing pairings. Existing = pairings reassociate already chose before *not* existing = pairings that already exist in the source IR Given that, we should probably group everything in favor of existing pairings when possible. > You are n...