On April 1, 2021 3:52:37 PM GMT+02:00, Erick Ochoa wrote:
>>
>> I don't think this would remove any problem that is present.
>>
>
>I have a problem understanding what you mean here because later on you
>state:
>
>> Now - the reason you think of is likely that IPA transform will
>instantiate
>> IPA
>
> I don't think this would remove any problem that is present.
>
I have a problem understanding what you mean here because later on you state:
> Now - the reason you think of is likely that IPA transform will instantiate
> IPA clones and do inlining and transfering the IPA PTA solution to the
>
> The reason this is not done is because the summaries (constraints)
> are huge, the solutions are even larger and the PTA solver doesn't
> scale to large units (so the LTRANS splitting makes it actually usable
> in the first place).
I did not spent that much time working on PTA as Richard, but it
On Thu, Apr 1, 2021 at 2:50 PM Erick Ochoa via Gcc wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> just a high level question. I know that IPA-PTA is a SIMPLE_IPA_PASS
> and that ideally it would be better as an IPA_PASS. I understand that
> one of the biggest challenges of changing IPA-PTA to an IPA_PASS is
> that on the cur
Hi,
just a high level question. I know that IPA-PTA is a SIMPLE_IPA_PASS
and that ideally it would be better as an IPA_PASS. I understand that
one of the biggest challenges of changing IPA-PTA to an IPA_PASS is
that on the current LTO framework, the LTRANS stage can happen at the
same time for mul
