Displaying 9 results from an estimated 9 matches for "vtpr".
Did you mean:
mtpr
2010 Aug 05
6
[PATCH 10/14] Nested Virtualization: svm specific implementation
Signed-off-by: Christoph Egger <Christoph.Egger@amd.com>
--
---to satisfy European Law for business letters:
Advanced Micro Devices GmbH
Einsteinring 24, 85609 Dornach b. Muenchen
Geschaeftsfuehrer: Alberto Bozzo, Andrew Bowd
Sitz: Dornach, Gemeinde Aschheim, Landkreis Muenchen
Registergericht Muenchen, HRB Nr. 43632
_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
2010 Oct 13
4
[LLVMdev] Missed devirtualization opportunities
...means you're now saying that llvm.invariant.end ought to be
>> left the way it is, right?
>
> I have no idea how to make use of llvm.invariant to help devirtualization.
> If no use or other use case for them can be found, maybe they should be
> removed.
Apply invariant to the vtpr as long as the corresponding instance
pointer is in use within a function. With an invariant vtpr (and
better invariant support, and a front-end that uses it),
devirtualization happens more or less automatically with
-std-compile-opts.
Do the same wherever an instance pointer is passed. Mark its...
2010 Oct 14
0
[LLVMdev] Missed devirtualization opportunities
...hat llvm.invariant.end ought to be
>>> left the way it is, right?
>>
>> I have no idea how to make use of llvm.invariant to help devirtualization.
>> If no use or other use case for them can be found, maybe they should be
>> removed.
>
> Apply invariant to the vtpr as long as the corresponding instance
> pointer is in use within a function. With an invariant vtpr (and
> better invariant support, and a front-end that uses it),
> devirtualization happens more or less automatically with
> -std-compile-opts.
That's not valid. Each function calle...
2010 Oct 13
0
[LLVMdev] Missed devirtualization opportunities
...t llvm.invariant.end ought to be
>>> left the way it is, right?
>>
>> I have no idea how to make use of llvm.invariant to help devirtualization.
>> If no use or other use case for them can be found, maybe they should be
>> removed.
>
> Apply invariant to the vtpr as long as the corresponding instance
> pointer is in use within a function. With an invariant vtpr (and
> better invariant support, and a front-end that uses it),
> devirtualization happens more or less automatically with
> -std-compile-opts.
Even if this works, it still requires us...
2010 Oct 14
2
[LLVMdev] Missed devirtualization opportunities
...t;>> left the way it is, right?
>>>
>>> I have no idea how to make use of llvm.invariant to help
>>> devirtualization.
>>> If no use or other use case for them can be found, maybe they should be
>>> removed.
>>
>> Apply invariant to the vtpr as long as the corresponding instance
>> pointer is in use within a function. With an invariant vtpr (and
>> better invariant support, and a front-end that uses it),
>> devirtualization happens more or less automatically with
>> -std-compile-opts.
>
> That's not v...
2010 Oct 13
0
[LLVMdev] Missed devirtualization opportunities
Kenneth Uildriks wrote:
>> You're right, I hadn't thought this through. The whole point of making them
>> local is to say that "I'm sure these callees won't modify that memory"
>> regardless of what functions actually get called, even indirectly. We can't
>> know that they won't modify the vptr in advance, so invariant doesn't work
2010 Oct 13
3
[LLVMdev] Missed devirtualization opportunities
> You're right, I hadn't thought this through. The whole point of making them
> local is to say that "I'm sure these callees won't modify that memory"
> regardless of what functions actually get called, even indirectly. We can't
> know that they won't modify the vptr in advance, so invariant doesn't work
> here. Making it non-local just means
2010 Oct 14
0
[LLVMdev] Missed devirtualization opportunities
...right?
>>>>
>>>> I have no idea how to make use of llvm.invariant to help
>>>> devirtualization.
>>>> If no use or other use case for them can be found, maybe they should be
>>>> removed.
>>>
>>> Apply invariant to the vtpr as long as the corresponding instance
>>> pointer is in use within a function. With an invariant vtpr (and
>>> better invariant support, and a front-end that uses it),
>>> devirtualization happens more or less automatically with
>>> -std-compile-opts.
>>...
2010 Oct 14
2
[LLVMdev] Missed devirtualization opportunities
...to be
>>>> left the way it is, right?
>>>
>>> I have no idea how to make use of llvm.invariant to help devirtualization.
>>> If no use or other use case for them can be found, maybe they should be
>>> removed.
>>
>> Apply invariant to the vtpr as long as the corresponding instance
>> pointer is in use within a function. With an invariant vtpr (and
>> better invariant support, and a front-end that uses it),
>> devirtualization happens more or less automatically with
>> -std-compile-opts.
>
> Even if this wor...