similar to: [LLVMdev] PROPOSAL: struct-access-path aware TBAA

Displaying 20 results from an estimated 10000 matches similar to: "[LLVMdev] PROPOSAL: struct-access-path aware TBAA"

2013 Mar 11
0
[LLVMdev] PROPOSAL: struct-access-path aware TBAA
On Mon, Mar 11, 2013 at 11:41 AM, Manman Ren <mren at apple.com> wrote: > Based on discussions with John McCall > > We currently focus on field accesses of structs, more specifically, on fields that are scalars or structs. > > Fundamental rules from C11 > -------------------------- > An object shall have its stored value accessed only by an lvalue expression that has one
2013 Mar 11
2
[LLVMdev] PROPOSAL: struct-access-path aware TBAA
On Mar 11, 2013, at 1:17 PM, Daniel Berlin <dberlin at dberlin.org> wrote: > On Mon, Mar 11, 2013 at 11:41 AM, Manman Ren <mren at apple.com> wrote: >> Based on discussions with John McCall >> >> We currently focus on field accesses of structs, more specifically, on fields that are scalars or structs. >> >> Fundamental rules from C11 >>
2013 Mar 11
4
[LLVMdev] PROPOSAL: struct-access-path aware TBAA
On Mar 11, 2013, at 2:37 PM, Daniel Berlin <dberlin at dberlin.org> wrote: > On Mon, Mar 11, 2013 at 2:06 PM, Manman Ren <mren at apple.com> wrote: >> >> On Mar 11, 2013, at 1:17 PM, Daniel Berlin <dberlin at dberlin.org> wrote: >> >>> On Mon, Mar 11, 2013 at 11:41 AM, Manman Ren <mren at apple.com> wrote: >>>> Based on
2013 Mar 11
0
[LLVMdev] PROPOSAL: struct-access-path aware TBAA
On Mon, Mar 11, 2013 at 3:45 PM, Manman Ren <mren at apple.com> wrote: > > On Mar 11, 2013, at 2:37 PM, Daniel Berlin <dberlin at dberlin.org> wrote: > >> On Mon, Mar 11, 2013 at 2:06 PM, Manman Ren <mren at apple.com> wrote: >>> >>> On Mar 11, 2013, at 1:17 PM, Daniel Berlin <dberlin at dberlin.org> wrote: >>> >>>> On
2013 Mar 11
2
[LLVMdev] PROPOSAL: struct-access-path aware TBAA
On Mar 11, 2013, at 4:23 PM, Daniel Berlin <dberlin at dberlin.org> wrote: > On Mon, Mar 11, 2013 at 3:45 PM, Manman Ren <mren at apple.com> wrote: >> >> On Mar 11, 2013, at 2:37 PM, Daniel Berlin <dberlin at dberlin.org> wrote: >> >>> On Mon, Mar 11, 2013 at 2:06 PM, Manman Ren <mren at apple.com> wrote: >>>> >>>>
2013 Mar 11
0
[LLVMdev] PROPOSAL: struct-access-path aware TBAA
On Mon, Mar 11, 2013 at 2:06 PM, Manman Ren <mren at apple.com> wrote: > > On Mar 11, 2013, at 1:17 PM, Daniel Berlin <dberlin at dberlin.org> wrote: > >> On Mon, Mar 11, 2013 at 11:41 AM, Manman Ren <mren at apple.com> wrote: >>> Based on discussions with John McCall >>> >>> We currently focus on field accesses of structs, more
2013 Mar 12
2
[LLVMdev] PROPOSAL: struct-access-path aware TBAA
On Mar 11, 2013, at 7:52 PM, Daniel Berlin wrote: > On Mon, Mar 11, 2013 at 4:56 PM, Manman Ren <mren at apple.com> wrote: >> >> On Mar 11, 2013, at 4:23 PM, Daniel Berlin <dberlin at dberlin.org> wrote: >> >>> On Mon, Mar 11, 2013 at 3:45 PM, Manman Ren <mren at apple.com> wrote: >>>> >>>> On Mar 11, 2013, at 2:37 PM,
2013 Mar 12
2
[LLVMdev] PROPOSAL: struct-access-path aware TBAA
On 3/11/13 1:17 PM, Daniel Berlin wrote: > On Mon, Mar 11, 2013 at 11:41 AM, Manman Ren <mren at apple.com> wrote: >> Based on discussions with John McCall >> >> We currently focus on field accesses of structs, more specifically, on fields that are scalars or structs. >> >> Fundamental rules from C11 >> -------------------------- >> An object
2013 Mar 12
0
[LLVMdev] PROPOSAL: struct-access-path aware TBAA
On Mon, Mar 11, 2013 at 4:56 PM, Manman Ren <mren at apple.com> wrote: > > On Mar 11, 2013, at 4:23 PM, Daniel Berlin <dberlin at dberlin.org> wrote: > >> On Mon, Mar 11, 2013 at 3:45 PM, Manman Ren <mren at apple.com> wrote: >>> >>> On Mar 11, 2013, at 2:37 PM, Daniel Berlin <dberlin at dberlin.org> wrote: >>> >>>> On
2013 Mar 13
3
[LLVMdev] PROPOSAL: struct-access-path aware TBAA
On Mar 12, 2013, at 12:20 PM, Daniel Berlin <dberlin at dberlin.org> wrote: > On Tue, Mar 12, 2013 at 10:10 AM, Manman Ren <mren at apple.com> wrote: >> >> On Mar 11, 2013, at 7:52 PM, Daniel Berlin wrote: >> >>> On Mon, Mar 11, 2013 at 4:56 PM, Manman Ren <mren at apple.com> wrote: >>>> >>>> On Mar 11, 2013, at 4:23 PM,
2013 Mar 12
0
[LLVMdev] PROPOSAL: struct-access-path aware TBAA
On Tue, Mar 12, 2013 at 10:10 AM, Manman Ren <mren at apple.com> wrote: > > On Mar 11, 2013, at 7:52 PM, Daniel Berlin wrote: > >> On Mon, Mar 11, 2013 at 4:56 PM, Manman Ren <mren at apple.com> wrote: >>> >>> On Mar 11, 2013, at 4:23 PM, Daniel Berlin <dberlin at dberlin.org> wrote: >>> >>>> On Mon, Mar 11, 2013 at 3:45 PM,
2013 Mar 13
0
[LLVMdev] PROPOSAL: struct-access-path aware TBAA
On Tue, Mar 12, 2013 at 5:59 PM, Manman Ren <mren at apple.com> wrote: > > On Mar 12, 2013, at 12:20 PM, Daniel Berlin <dberlin at dberlin.org> wrote: > >> On Tue, Mar 12, 2013 at 10:10 AM, Manman Ren <mren at apple.com> wrote: >>> >>> On Mar 11, 2013, at 7:52 PM, Daniel Berlin wrote: >>> >>>> On Mon, Mar 11, 2013 at 4:56 PM,
2013 Mar 13
0
[LLVMdev] PROPOSAL: struct-access-path aware TBAA
On Tue, Mar 12, 2013 at 3:44 PM, Shuxin Yang <shuxin.llvm at gmail.com> wrote: > > On 3/11/13 1:17 PM, Daniel Berlin wrote: >> >> On Mon, Mar 11, 2013 at 11:41 AM, Manman Ren <mren at apple.com> wrote: >>> >>> Based on discussions with John McCall >>> >>> We currently focus on field accesses of structs, more specifically, on
2013 Mar 12
3
[LLVMdev] PROPOSAL: struct-access-path aware TBAA
On Mar 12, 2013, at 8:22 AM, Krzysztof Parzyszek wrote: > What cases does this proposal solve that the current analyses don't? Do you have a motivating example? Given struct A { int x; int y; }; struct B { A a; int z; }; struct C { B b1; B b2; }; struct D { C c; }; with struct-access-path aware TBAA, C::b1.a.x does not alias with D::c.b2.a.x.
2013 Mar 13
1
[LLVMdev] PROPOSAL: struct-access-path aware TBAA (should we use offset+size instead of path?)
On Mar 12, 2013, at 6:07 PM, Daniel Berlin wrote: > On Tue, Mar 12, 2013 at 5:59 PM, Manman Ren <mren at apple.com> wrote: >> >> On Mar 12, 2013, at 12:20 PM, Daniel Berlin <dberlin at dberlin.org> wrote: >> >>> On Tue, Mar 12, 2013 at 10:10 AM, Manman Ren <mren at apple.com> wrote: >>>> >>>> On Mar 11, 2013, at 7:52 PM,
2013 Mar 13
0
[LLVMdev] PROPOSAL: struct-access-path aware TBAA
On 3/12/2013 12:13 PM, Manman Ren wrote: > > Given > struct A { > int x; > int y; > }; > struct B { > A a; > int z; > }; > struct C { > B b1; > B b2; > }; > struct D { > C c; > }; > > with struct-access-path aware TBAA, C::b1.a.x does not alias with D::c.b2.a.x.
2013 Mar 11
2
[LLVMdev] PROPOSAL: struct-access-path aware TBAA
On Mar 11, 2013, at 12:14 PM, Krzysztof Parzyszek wrote: > On 3/11/2013 1:41 PM, Manman Ren wrote: >> >> | x | >> extends >> | z | >> super-type >> | y | > > What does this mean? "The type of z extends the type of x, and the type of z is a super-type of y"? Extends x into a subobject z, and z is
2013 Mar 12
0
[LLVMdev] PROPOSAL: struct-access-path aware TBAA
What cases does this proposal solve that the current analyses don't? Do you have a motivating example? -Krzysztof -- Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. is a member of Code Aurora Forum, hosted by The Linux Foundation
2013 Mar 27
1
[LLVMdev] PROPOSAL: struct-access-path aware TBAA (new version)
Hello, After discussions with Daniel, Dan and others, here is an updated proposal for struct-access-path aware TBAA. Given an example struct A { int x; int y; }; struct B { A a; int z; }; struct C { B b1; B b2; int *p; }; struct D { C c; }; The purpose of struct-path-aware TBAA is to say "C::b1.a" will alias with "B::a.x", "C::b1.a" will alias with
2013 Oct 08
2
[LLVMdev] dragonegg: switch from old TBAA format to the new struct-path aware TBAA format
Hi Duncan, I am hoping to remove the support for the old TBAA format soon. You should be able to switch to the new format by replacing MDNode *AliasTag = MDHelper.createTBAANode(TreeName, getTBAARoot()); with MDNode *AliasType = MDHelper.createTBAAScalarTypeNode(TreeName, getTBAARoot()); MDNode *AliasTag = MDHelper.createTBAAStructTagNode(AliasType, AliasType, 0) Also replacing