[llvm-dev] [RFC] Polly Status and Integration

[Michael Kruse via llvm-dev]

2017-10-14 5:03 GMT+02:00 Daniel Berlin <dberlin at dberlin.org>:
> FWIW: We hit a subset of this issue with MemorySSA (which subclasses value
> for the MemoryAccess's, etc), and it was discussed as well during
> PredicateInfo.
>
> NewGVN has a variant the same issue as well, where it actually creates
> unattached (IE not in a basic block) new instructions just so it can analyze
> them.
>
> IMHO, some nice way to make virtual forms over the instructions that didn't
> require reimplementing the tons of existing functionality that works with
> Value would be much appreciated.
>
> But maybe the right answer at some point is to just sit down and build out
> such an infrastructure. It certainly sounds like there are enough clients.

What would be different in such an infrastructure? IMHO the
llvm::Value hierarchy is already relatively thin, e.g.
removing/inserting an instruction just requires updating a linked
list.

Michael