[LLVMdev] IntervalPartition and Intervals per function

[Prakash Prabhu]

Hi Chris,

Thanks for the reply.  I am actually interested in using the Intervals
Analysis mainly to be able to do Region based analysis. In fact, I
found that the way Intervals are defined mirror exactly the definition
of a Region in the second edition of the Dragon Book (Section 9.7 on
Region-Based Analysis), so it will be great if the Intervals related
code still lives on in LLVM :).

  I found a fix for the bug, which may not be very elegant,  but works
none the less. Firstly, the destroy() method in IntervalPartition.cpp
did not clear the Intervals vector and secondly, since destroy() is
only called from the destructor the state of the intervals is
maintained across different runOnFunction() calls. So now I clear the
Intervals vector in destroy() and call destroy() to start on a clean
state before doing the processing (as was done earlier) in
runOnFunction. I am attaching the patch with this mail.

regards,
Prakash

On Wed, Aug 27, 2008 at 4:41 PM, Chris Lattner <clattner at apple.com> wrote:
>
> On Aug 27, 2008, at 1:35 PM, Prakash Prabhu wrote:
>
>> Hi,
>>
>> I wrote a Function pass that requires the IntervalPartition pass in
>> order to obtain the set of intervals for every function:
>>
>> However when i access the intervals vector for a particular call of
>> runOnFunction, it seems that alll intervals computed for the earlier
>> functions are still in the
>> vector. To verify this, I added some debug in addIntervalToPartition:
>
> Sounds like a bug.  Interval analysis is some of the oldest code in
> LLVM and was never widely used (once I implemented the first dominator
> info, it became unneeded).
>
>> As seen above, the intervals computed for lresurrect are still present
>> in the intervals vector, when function ldndate is accessed. Is this
>> expected ? Or maybe I am missing something here ?
>
> I wouldn't be surprised if interval analysis was totally broken.  Are
> you interested in tracking it down and fixing the problem?
> Alternatively, maybe we should remove the code from LLVM.
>
> -Chris
> _______________________________________________
> LLVM Developers mailing list
> LLVMdev at cs.uiuc.edu         http://llvm.cs.uiuc.edu
> http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/llvmdev
>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: IntervalPartition.cpp.patch
Type: text/x-diff
Size: 773 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/attachments/20080827/f1a14e1a/attachment.patch>