Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > comp.compilers > #332

Re: How to eliminate redundant constant move instructions

Show all headers | View raw

On Nov 5, 5:26 am, George Neuner <gneun...@comcast.net> wrote:
> On Tue, 1 Nov 2011 19:21:54 -0700 (PDT), amker <can.fin...@gmail.com>
> wrote:

> >Yes, I have noticed this pass. Seems it can solve the problem if I
> >can:
> >1, extend the pass in value numbering way, at least for const values.
> >2, extend the pass in global data analysis way.
>
> Yes.  But value numbering doesn't know or care what specific value is
> in the register - it cares only whether the value in the register
> might have been changed between read uses.
>
> Variable value tracking is the related technique used for constant
> propagation.  However what you are after is variable equivalence
> testing - I don't think GCC even tries to do this.

Yes, I guess it is the variable value tracking. But I think GCC does
do such work in some passes, at least cse.c. In this pass gcc records
the constant value if a quantity has a known constant value.  Then gcc
simplify expressions containing such constant value by calling
fold_rtx.

Unfortunately, cse only works on basis of extended basic block.
Nothing it can do for global cases as reported in mentioned bug.

Also, could you point me some papers of implementation of such
variable value tracking technique? I googled and found nothing
about it.

Thanks

Back to comp.compilers | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar

Thread

How to eliminate redundant constant move instructions "Amker.Cheng" <amker.cheng@gmail.com> - 2011-10-31 17:53 +0800
  Re: How to eliminate redundant constant move instructions Kaz Kylheku <kaz@kylheku.com> - 2011-10-31 17:08 +0000
    Re: How to eliminate redundant constant move instructions amker <can.finner@gmail.com> - 2011-11-01 19:01 -0700
    Re: How to eliminate redundant constant move instructions mac <acolvin@efunct.com> - 2011-11-03 02:20 +0000
  Re: How to eliminate redundant constant move instructions George Neuner <gneuner2@comcast.net> - 2011-11-01 14:32 -0400
    Re: How to eliminate redundant constant move instructions glen herrmannsfeldt <gah@ugcs.caltech.edu> - 2011-11-01 22:35 +0000
      Re: How to eliminate redundant constant move instructions amker <can.finner@gmail.com> - 2011-11-01 19:35 -0700
      Re: How to eliminate redundant constant move instructions amker <amker.cheng@gmail.com> - 2011-11-01 21:04 -0700
      Re: How to eliminate redundant constant move instructions George Neuner <gneuner2@comcast.net> - 2011-11-02 12:38 -0400
        Re: How to eliminate redundant constant move instructions Kaz Kylheku <kaz@kylheku.com> - 2011-11-03 03:20 +0000
          Re: How to eliminate redundant constant move instructions George Neuner <gneuner2@comcast.net> - 2011-11-04 13:27 -0400
            Re: How to eliminate redundant constant move instructions glen herrmannsfeldt <gah@ugcs.caltech.edu> - 2011-11-04 21:19 +0000
        Re: How to eliminate redundant constant move instructions glen herrmannsfeldt <gah@ugcs.caltech.edu> - 2011-11-03 03:32 +0000
    Re: How to eliminate redundant constant move instructions amker <can.finner@gmail.com> - 2011-11-01 19:21 -0700
      Re: How to eliminate redundant constant move instructions George Neuner <gneuner2@comcast.net> - 2011-11-04 17:26 -0400
        Re: How to eliminate redundant constant move instructions amker <amker.cheng@gmail.com> - 2011-11-07 17:33 -0800
          Re: How to eliminate redundant constant move instructions Wei-Jen Chen <chenwj@cs.NCTU.edu.tw> - 2011-11-10 08:04 +0000
          Re: How to eliminate redundant constant move instructions George Neuner <gneuner2@comcast.net> - 2011-11-10 18:18 -0500
    Re: How to eliminate redundant constant move instructions amker <amker.cheng@gmail.com> - 2011-11-01 20:58 -0700

csiph-web