[llvm-commits] DependenceAnalysis patch

[Sebastian Pop]

Preston Briggs wrote:
> Here's a smaller patch that only removes a few "const" qualifiers so that I
> can (someday) call SE->getSCEV without complaint.
> No semantic change intended.

Committed as r168391.
Preston, could you please contact Chris to get svn write permissions?
See the instructions here:
http://llvm.org/docs/DeveloperPolicy.html#obtaining-commit-access

Thanks,
Sebastian

> 
> Thans,
> Preston
> 
> 
> 
> On Tue, Nov 20, 2012 at 9:02 AM, Sebastian Pop <spop at codeaurora.org> wrote:
> 
> > Hi Preston,
> >
> > could you please format the patches with diff -p? That provides for each
> > hunk in
> > the patch the function name you are modifying.  Here is my config to add
> > -p to svn:
> >
> > $ grep diff-cmd ~/.subversion/config
> > diff-cmd = ~/bin/my-diff.sh
> >
> > $ cat ~/bin/my-diff.sh
> > diff=/usr/bin/diff
> > args="-up"
> >
> > exec ${diff} ${args} "$@"
> >
> >
> > Preston Briggs wrote:
> > > Still hoping for a review & commit of this patch to the dependence
> > analysis.
> > > It's not so big...
> > >
> > >    - Mostly I look for cases where relying on the GEPs alone doesn't make
> > >    sense. When I find such cases, I just use the raw SCEVs directly. This
> > >    corrects my earlier error, plus enables us to analyze many pointer
> > >    dereferences effectively, addressing Chandler's complaints.
> > >    - I had to update many lines of code to remove the "const" qualifier
> > on
> > >    instructions passed into DA so that I could call SE->getSCEV().
> >
> > This part can be submitted separately.  Do you mind splitting this from the
> > current patch and submit that separately.  Please add a "no semantic change
> > intended" note in the commit message.
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Sebastian
> >
> > >    - The results of all the test cases had to change slightly, 'cause
> > we're
> > >    now able to test the pointer dereferences instead of simply reporting
> > >    "Confused" (all my test cases need to test an for an output dependence
> > >    between stores to *B++).
> > >
> > > Thank,
> > > Preston
> > >
> > >
> > > On Wed, Nov 14, 2012 at 3:46 PM, Preston Briggs <
> > preston.briggs at gmail.com>wrote:
> > >
> > > > Here's an updated patch for DA.
> > > > It corrects the problem Chandler found,
> > > > plus handles pointer dereferencing in a reasonable fashion.
> > > > Test cases are updated to match.
> > > >
> > > > If someone could review this change and check it in, if appropriate,
> > I'd
> > > > be obliged.
> > > >
> > > > Thanks,
> > > > Preston
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > On Tue, Nov 13, 2012 at 4:15 AM, Benjamin Kramer <benny.kra at gmail.com
> > >wrote:
> > > >
> > > >>
> > > >> On 07.11.2012, at 21:51, Preston Briggs <preston.briggs at gmail.com>
> > wrote:
> > > >>
> > > >> > Here's a patch that covers the problems reported by Chandler last
> > week.
> > > >> > It checks the base pointer of each GEP to be sure they are loop
> > > >> invariant. The patch also updates the -analyze functionality so that
> > all
> > > >> pairs of memory references are tested. Finally, all the test cases
> > have
> > > >> been updated.
> > > >> >
> > > >> > I haven't yet updated DA to analyze pairs of pointer dereferences. I
> > > >> wanted to get the initial correction in place first. I also expect
> > that
> > > >> analyzer pointer derefs will benefit from delinearization and am
> > hoping it
> > > >> gets incorporated soon.
> > > >> >
> > > >> > If someone could review this change and check it in, if appropriate,
> > > >> I'd be obliged.
> > > >>
> > > >> Hi Preston,
> > > >>
> > > >> Patch looks good, however, please send changes like this in smaller,
> > > >> incremental patches. A 300 KB diff
> > > >> is hard to review, especially when there are different changes
> > > >> intertwined.
> > > >>
> > > >> I went ahead and committed the test case fixes along with the change
> > to
> > > >> dump all pairs in r167827. The remaining bits are in the attached
> > file, I'd
> > > >> like to have a second pair of eyes looking over it before it goes in.
> > > >>
> > > >>
> > > >
> >
> >
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > llvm-commits mailing list
> > > llvm-commits at cs.uiuc.edu
> > > http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/llvm-commits
> >
> >
> > --
> > Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. is a member of Code Aurora Forum, hosted
> > by The Linux Foundation
> >



-- 
Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. is a member of Code Aurora Forum, hosted by The Linux Foundation