[llvm-dev] Live range priority in Greedy RA (original) (raw)

Matthias Braun via llvm-dev llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org
Tue Oct 30 10:47:56 PDT 2018


This may or may not be a good idea. Here's some hand-wavy reason why it may not be a good idea:

Ultimately the best way to argue here, is running benchmarks and looking at concrete situations. So the best way to prove this is to implement it, run it on various benchmarks and see how it performs.

On Oct 30, 2018, at 4:51 AM, Dangeti Tharun kumar via llvm-dev <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote:

Hi, In the Greedy RA, I see that the enqueue method adds higher priority to the live intervals based on their sizes. Isn't it makes sense to give priority to live intervals that start and end in a loop? Please let me know if the code is already achieving it in some way. Also consider correcting me, if this approach is wrong. -- Regards, DTharun


LLVM Developers mailing list llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-dev

-------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/attachments/20181030/3aa0f619/attachment.html>



More information about the llvm-dev mailing list