search for: simplespiller

Hi all, Is anyone still using SimpleRewriter (formerly known as SimpleSpiller)? A quick check with the test suite suggests that it's badly broken. If it's not being used I'd like to remove it as part of my tidy-up of the register allocator. - Lang.

I've been playing around with spillers and found that the SimpleSpiller fails badly on a particular code. The problem arises because SimpleSpiller does the test VRM.isAssignedReg(virtReg) which is implemented as: 00183 bool isAssignedReg(unsigned virtReg) const { 00184 if (getStackSlot(virtReg) == NO_STACK_SLOT && 00185 getReMatId(virtRe...

I vote for execution of SimpleRewriter. Evan On Jun 3, 2009, at 1:34 PM, Lang Hames wrote: > Hi all, > > Is anyone still using SimpleRewriter (formerly known as > SimpleSpiller)? A quick check with the test suite suggests that it's > badly broken. If it's not being used I'd like to remove it as part of > my tidy-up of the register allocator. > > - Lang. > _______________________________________________ > LLVM Developers mailing list > LLVM...

...Evan Cheng wrote: > I vote for execution of SimpleRewriter. Yeah, go ahead and axe it: Off with its head! -Chris > > > Evan > > On Jun 3, 2009, at 1:34 PM, Lang Hames wrote: > >> Hi all, >> >> Is anyone still using SimpleRewriter (formerly known as >> SimpleSpiller)? A quick check with the test suite suggests that it's >> badly broken. If it's not being used I'd like to remove it as part of >> my tidy-up of the register allocator. >> >> - Lang. >> _______________________________________________ >> LLVM Developer...

...> > Yeah, go ahead and axe it: Off with its head! > > -Chris > >> >> >> Evan >> >> On Jun 3, 2009, at 1:34 PM, Lang Hames wrote: >> >>> Hi all, >>> >>> Is anyone still using SimpleRewriter (formerly known as >>> SimpleSpiller)? A quick check with the test suite suggests that it's >>> badly broken. If it's not being used I'd like to remove it as part of >>> my tidy-up of the register allocator. >>> >>> - Lang. >>> _______________________________________________ &gt...

The new spilling framework inserts spill code in-place (during register allocation) rather than deferring it using VirtRegMap/VirtRegRewriter. The goal is to enable techniques like iterative splitting to be implemented. It should also be a bit tidier as it keeps more state in the MachineFunction, rather than in book-keeping structures like VirtRegMap. The work is in the very early stages though.

On Thursday 04 June 2009 19:03, Lang Hames wrote: > The new spilling framework inserts spill code in-place (during > register allocation) rather than deferring it using > VirtRegMap/VirtRegRewriter. The goal is to enable techniques like > iterative splitting to be implemented. It should also be a bit tidier > as it keeps more state in the MachineFunction, rather than in >

On Thursday 04 June 2009 13:57, Lang Hames wrote: > R.I.P. SimpleRewriter. If anyone needs it resurrected let me know. > > This leaves LocalRewriter (the default) and the new TrivialRewriter, > which is for use only with the new in-place spilling framework. This > framework appears (if you squint just right) to be basically > functional now, but it produces awful code. If you

On May 27, 2008, at 5:36 PM, David Greene wrote: > I've been playing around with spillers and found that the > SimpleSpiller fails > badly on a particular code. > > The problem arises because SimpleSpiller does the test > VRM.isAssignedReg(virtReg) which is implemented as: > > 00183 bool isAssignedReg(unsigned virtReg) const { > 00184 if (getStackSlot(virtReg) == NO_STACK_SLOT && &g...

On Friday 30 May 2008 15:13, Evan Cheng wrote: > No, every vr is assigned a physical register. It needs to know how > what physical register to reload it, for example. Looks like > SimpleSpiller has bit-rotted. There really isn't a good reason to fix > it. Unless you want to use it, I'll just remove it. No, don't remove it! It's a valuable debugging tool. I've got it working now but am in the middle of hunting this bug I found. Once things have stabilized here I&...