[llvm-dev] Move InlineCost.cpp out of Analysis?

[Chandler Carruth via llvm-dev]

On Mon, Apr 18, 2016 at 4:38 PM Xinliang David Li <davidxl at google.com>
wrote:

>
>>>> Now, the original design only accounted for profile information
>>>> *within* a function body, clearly it needs to be extended to support
>>>> intraprocedural information.
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Not sure what you mean.  Profile data in general does not extend to IPA
>>> (we will reopen discussion on that soon), but profile summary is
>>> 'invariant'/readonly data, which should be available to IPA already.
>>>
>>
>> I don't know what you mean by "invariant" or readonly data here. I think
>> that whether or not the profile information is mutated shouldn't influence
>> the design invariants I described above.
>>
>
> I do not disagree with this. What I was saying is that the information can
> be made available to IPA in some form due to its readonly nature.
>

While it can be made available, it is very hard to make it available even
in a readonly form in the current pass manager.

You essentially have to avoid caching anything and make the API always
re-examine the IR annotations in order to reflect changes to them. There
are a few other "Immutable" analysis passes that abuse the legacy pass
manager in this way. That seems fine as a temporary thing. I don't *think*
this kind of information would pose a significant compile time cost to
recompute on each query, but I've not looked at the nature of the IPA
queries you would want to make.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/attachments/20160419/7b50ce90/attachment.html>