similar to: [LLVMdev] Question about VNInfo updates by LiveIntervals::addIntervalsForSpills

On Thursday 17 January 2008 13:03, Evan Cheng wrote: > > So why does the live range extend throughout the entire basic block? > > > > %reg1055 doesn't appear anywhere else in the program so it shouldn't > > be > > live-in to the block. > > It could be a bug. Can you get me a test case? I'll see if I can whittle it down. It's a pretty huge

I just ran into a problem here. I'm in SimpleRegisterCoalescing at the point where EXTRACT_SUBREG coalescing updates live ranges of aliased registers (around line 473 of SimpleRegisterCoalescing.cpp). There's a call to MergeValueInAsValue at line 50. MergeValueInAsValue has this code: void LiveInterval::MergeValueInAsValue(const LiveInterval &RHS,

On Jan 16, 2008, at 11:49 AM, David Greene wrote: > I had been assuming that give a LiveRange a, a.valno->def, if > valid, would be the same as a.start. But this is apparently not > always the case. For example: > > Predecessors according to CFG: 0x839d130 (#3) 0x8462780 (#35) > 308 %reg1051 = MOV64rr %reg1227<kill> > 312 %reg1052 = MOV64rr %reg1228<kill>

Hi all, I'm tracking down a register allocation problem and I'm trying to understand this piece of code in InlineSpiller::spillAroundUses: // Find the slot index where this instruction reads and writes OldLI. // This is usually the def slot, except for tied early clobbers. SlotIndex Idx = LIS.getInstructionIndex(*MI).getRegSlot(); if (VNInfo *VNI =

Evan, Can you explain the basic mechanics of the live interval splitting code? Is it all in LiveIntervalAnalysis.cpp under addIntervalsForSpills and child routines? What is it trying to do? Also, in the ancient subregister coalescing code, there used to be an update of the SSARegMap to point subregisters to the superregister they were coalesced to (IIRC). That has since gone away. I used to

In LLVM 3.1, given a VNInfo, how do I get the range information for that value? I've tried looking at the MachineInstr at the def point, getting its defined register and looking at LiveIntervals to get an interval for the register, but that doesn't always return something sane. I'm in the middle of InlineSpiller so LiveRangeEdit is in play. Thanks for your help!

Hi, I'm working on the implementation of Extended Linear Scan register allocator as described by Sarkar & Bodik. One of the interesting features of their algorithm is the possibility to allocate different physical registers to different live-ranges of the same LiveInterval. Of course, it may require some glue code to be inserted in cases, where different physical regs were assigned to

On Wednesday 23 January 2008 02:01, Evan Cheng wrote: > On Jan 22, 2008, at 12:23 PM, David Greene wrote: > > Evan, > > > > Can you explain the basic mechanics of the live interval splitting > > code? > > Is it all in LiveIntervalAnalysis.cpp under addIntervalsForSpills > > and child > > routines? What is it trying to do? > > It's splitting

Hello, I am currently working another register allocator for LLVM, and I have a few questions. I have a list of LiveIntervals that interfere with each other, and once I figure out that I need to spill one of these, I'm using LiveIntervals::addIntervalsForSpills to generate spill code. I'm not sure I'm using this function correctly (or if it's even the right thing to use).

Post-phi-elimination, when can a LiveInterval VNInfo have a ~1 or ~0 def value? I've seen ~0 on intervals created for spills. Can it happen anywhere else? -Dave

On Jan 23, 2008, at 2:40 PM, David Greene <dag at cray.com> wrote: > On Wednesday 23 January 2008 02:01, Evan Cheng wrote: >> On Jan 22, 2008, at 12:23 PM, David Greene wrote: >>> Evan, >>> >>> Can you explain the basic mechanics of the live interval splitting >>> code? >>> Is it all in LiveIntervalAnalysis.cpp under

On Jan 22, 2008, at 12:23 PM, David Greene wrote: > Evan, > > Can you explain the basic mechanics of the live interval splitting > code? > Is it all in LiveIntervalAnalysis.cpp under addIntervalsForSpills > and child > routines? What is it trying to do? It's splitting live intervals that span multiple basic blocks. That is, when an interval is spilled, it

Hi Evan, I have a few questions about current implementation of live intervals spilling, which is required for the implementation of Extended Linear Scan algorithm. --- Evan Cheng <evan.cheng at apple.com> wrote: > > On Wednesday 23 January 2008 02:01, Evan Cheng wrote: > >> On Jan 22, 2008, at 12:23 PM, David Greene wrote: > >>> Evan, > >>> >

On Feb 27, 2009, at 7:20 AM, Roman Levenstein wrote: > Hi, > > I'm working on the implementation of Extended Linear Scan register > allocator as described by Sarkar & Bodik. > One of the interesting features of their algorithm is the possibility > to allocate different physical registers to different live-ranges of > the same LiveInterval. Of course, it may require

When compiling trunk using gcc 4.1.2 on linux/ppc64, I now see a warning that I don't remember seeing previously: llvm[2]: Compiling InlineSpiller.cpp for Release+Asserts build /src/llvm-trunk-dev/include/llvm/ADT/PointerIntPair.h: In member function ‘const PointerTy* llvm::PointerIntPair<PointerTy, IntBits, IntType, PtrTraits>::getAddrOfPointer() const [with PointerTy = void*, unsigned

On 8/7/07, David Greene <dag at cray.com> wrote: > > On Monday 06 August 2007 12:15, Anton Vayvod wrote: > > > Spill intervals must be precolored because they can't be spilled once > more. > > They are the shortest intervals precisely over each def/use of the > original > > interval. That is why they also have their weights set to #INF. > > Yes,

On Jan 17, 2008, at 1:49 PM, David Greene wrote: > Post-phi-elimination, when can a LiveInterval VNInfo have a ~1 or ~0 > def > value? I've seen ~0 on intervals created for spills. Can it happen > anywhere > else? They can be created during coalescing. Evan > > > -Dave >

Hi Evan, Thanks a lot for your reply! 2009/2/27 Evan Cheng <evan.cheng at apple.com>: > > On Feb 27, 2009, at 7:20 AM, Roman Levenstein wrote: > >> Hi, >> >> I'm working on the implementation of Extended Linear Scan register >> allocator as described by Sarkar & Bodik. >> One of the interesting features of their algorithm is the possibility

Hi Jonas, Thanks for your patience. After spending some time looking at the additional output you gave me, I agree that your fix is the right one. I was worried that this problem may arise because we were spilling not real user, but in fact what I thought was the problem is an optimization we could do :). See my comments inlined for a few nitpicks before you commit. Thanks again, -Quentin On

I had been assuming that give a LiveRange a, a.valno->def, if valid, would be the same as a.start. But this is apparently not always the case. For example: Predecessors according to CFG: 0x839d130 (#3) 0x8462780 (#35) 308 %reg1051 = MOV64rr %reg1227<kill> 312 %reg1052 = MOV64rr %reg1228<kill> 316 %reg1053 = MOV64rr %reg1229<kill> 320 %reg1054 = MOV64rr