Hi,
On Wed, 12 Sep 2007, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> I haven't looked at the tree-SSA if-convert code yet, but based on what
> was described to me at the summit it seemed to be taking the same
> approach as the RTL pass. Recognize certain patterns and convert it.
>
> I would like to see an app
On 9/12/07, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Tehila asked me a while ago to comment based on my experience with the
> RTL if convert pass and the discussions some of us had at the GCC
> summit. Sorry it took me so long to respond.
>
> The target I care about (Cell SPU) has some thing
Tehila asked me a while ago to comment based on my experience with the
RTL if convert pass and the discussions some of us had at the GCC
summit. Sorry it took me so long to respond.
The target I care about (Cell SPU) has some things that make an
aggressive if convert very useful and profitable.
Hi,
On Mon, 6 Aug 2007, Tehila Meyzels wrote:
> > in if-conv (or phi-opt), but in ssa-sink (or some similar transformation
> > which can or can not use value numbers and the like).
>
> OK.
>
> And what's your opinion WRT conditional loads/stores?
> Since you've sent your conditional store trans
Michael Matz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote on 31/07/2007 18:05:53:
> Hi,
>
> On Tue, 31 Jul 2007, Daniel Berlin wrote:
>
> > > 2. Store-sinking/load hoisting may have an overhead and may degrade
> > > performance unless the relevant conditional branch gets if-converted.
> >
> > I agree with you for co
On 8/1/07, Ayal Zaks <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> "Daniel Berlin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote on 01/08/2007 18:27:35:
>
> > On 8/1/07, Tehila Meyzels <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > "Daniel Berlin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote on 31/07/2007 18:00:57:
> > >
> > > >
> > > > I agree with you for condition
"Daniel Berlin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote on 01/08/2007 18:27:35:
> On 8/1/07, Tehila Meyzels <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > "Daniel Berlin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote on 31/07/2007 18:00:57:
> >
> > >
> > > I agree with you for conditional stores/loads.
> >
> > Great!
> >
> > >
> > > The unconditi
On 8/1/07, Tehila Meyzels <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> "Daniel Berlin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote on 31/07/2007 18:00:57:
>
> >
> > I agree with you for conditional stores/loads.
>
> Great!
>
> >
> > The unconditional store/load stuff, however, is exactly what
> > tree-ssa-sink was meant to do, and
"Daniel Berlin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote on 31/07/2007 18:00:57:
>
> I agree with you for conditional stores/loads.
Great!
>
> The unconditional store/load stuff, however, is exactly what
> tree-ssa-sink was meant to do, and belongs there (this is #3 above).
> I'm certainly going to fight tooth
Hi,
On Tue, 31 Jul 2007, Daniel Berlin wrote:
> > 2. Store-sinking/load hoisting may have an overhead and may degrade
> > performance unless the relevant conditional branch gets if-converted.
>
> I agree with you for conditional stores/loads.
>
> The unconditional store/load stuff, however, is
On 7/31/07, Tehila Meyzels <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> I'd like to bring up on the list a discussion that a bunch of people (most
> of those CC-ed above) started at the GCC Summit:
>
> Lately, there were few efforts, that are not necessarily related to each
> other, but are all relevant
11 matches
Mail list logo
