[PATCH] Templatify RegionInfo

Chandler Carruth chandlerc at google.com
Mon Jul 7 19:46:05 PDT 2014

So, not really a comment on this specific patch, but how much more effort
do we want to push into the region support in LLVM?

Last time I tried to use the region infrastructure I found it was generally
incomplete and no one was happy about relying on dominance frontiers. Are
these still significant concerns? What is the path forward? I was easily
able to rewrite my code in terms of DominatorTrees instead of regions, and
it in some ways became simpler, so I'm not really sold lots of effort going
into enhancing the support of regions in the optimizer.

Previously, it seemed like the region infrastructure in the optimizer
served an important role of making it easy to experiment and explore
optimizations in this space without imposing much maintenance burden for
such experiments. But pushing the region support down into the machine
layer seems much more to do with making this a core part of the expected
optimization strategy, so that's why I'm asking now.

On Mon, Jul 7, 2014 at 6:06 PM, Matt Arsenault <arsenm2 at gmail.com> wrote:

> Hi,
> These patches do the bruteforce work of templatifying RegionInfo /
> DominanceFrontier so they can be used on MachineBasicBlocks, mostly by
> trying to mimic what DominatorTree and LoopInfo already do for this. These
> build, but I haven’t yet gotten to doing anything useful with them yet.
> _______________________________________________
> llvm-commits mailing list
> llvm-commits at cs.uiuc.edu
> http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/llvm-commits
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-commits/attachments/20140707/c04c9daa/attachment.html>

More information about the llvm-commits mailing list