Displaying 4 results from an estimated 4 matches for "ressrcint".
2008 Feb 21
2
[LLVMdev] Bug? Coalescing & Updating Subreg Intervals
...lobberRanges that %reg15
> would contain [458,5168:0 [0]). But it doesn't.
So this is the call site?
// Update the liveintervals of sub-registers.
for (const unsigned *AS = tri_->getSubRegisters(DstReg); *AS; ++AS)
li_->getOrCreateInterval(*AS).MergeInClobberRanges(*ResSrcInt,
li_-
>getVNInfoAllocator());
Can you take a look at MergeInClobberRanges() to see what is going on?
Otherwise, please file a bug with a test case.
Evan
>
>
> -Dave
> ____________...
2008 Feb 21
0
[LLVMdev] Bug? Coalescing & Updating Subreg Intervals
On Wednesday 20 February 2008 07:00:28 pm Evan Cheng wrote:
> > In other words, after coalescing, should it be the case that
> > subregister
> > intervals contain at least all of the range information that was
> > contained
> > in any eliminated intervals when those eliminated intervals were
> > coalesced
> > to the subregister's superregister?
>
2008 Feb 21
0
[LLVMdev] Bug? Coalescing & Updating Subreg Intervals
...; would contain [458,5168:0 [0]). But it doesn't.
>
> So this is the call site?
>
> // Update the liveintervals of sub-registers.
> for (const unsigned *AS = tri_->getSubRegisters(DstReg); *AS; ++AS)
> li_->getOrCreateInterval(*AS).MergeInClobberRanges(*ResSrcInt,
> li_-
Yep.
> >getVNInfoAllocator());
>
> Can you take a look at MergeInClobberRanges() to see what is going on?
> Otherwise, please file a bug with a test case.
Yes. I think I know what's going on. This happens in SPEC...
2008 Feb 21
2
[LLVMdev] Bug? Coalescing & Updating Subreg Intervals
On Feb 20, 2008, at 12:25 PM, David Greene wrote:
> On Wednesday 20 February 2008 14:14, David Greene wrote:
>
>> I discovered this through an assert I put into some of my own
>> code. I want
>> to know if that assert is bogus or if there's a bug here.
>
> A little more information: the assert checks that after coalescing
> two nodes,
> all subregister