-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 29
[AIEX] Add address chaining for fixed stack objects #669
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
base: aie-public
Are you sure you want to change the base?
Conversation
; CHECK-NEXT: nop | ||
; CHECK-NEXT: nop | ||
; CHECK-NEXT: nop | ||
; CHECK-NEXT: mov p0, sp |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Interesting case, I will take a look!
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I looks like we combine frame index + load store to _spill variants. I tried to prevent this case, but it also prevents some good opportunities.
3d573aa
to
8b2d38e
Compare
if (!MFI.isFixedObjectIndex(FrameIdx)) | ||
continue; | ||
|
||
if (IsUsedByLoad(FIInstr)) |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
should we worry about stores?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
why do we differentiate between loads and non-loads? shouldn't it only be related to the FrameIdx?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Maybe we could vanish this, because we break the chain using hasMixedLoadStoreUse
. I will check this.
8b2d38e
to
a6b6eb4
Compare
} | ||
|
||
bool Changed = false; | ||
auto ReplaceFI = [&](std::vector<MachineInstr *> &FIs) { |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
nit: with the simplification, do we need the lambda here?
No description provided.