Hi Luc, On 4 September 2017 at 21:55, Luc Van Oostenryck <luc.vanoostenryck@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Mon, Sep 04, 2017 at 09:37:17PM +0100, Dibyendu Majumdar wrote: >> On 4 September 2017 at 21:07, Luc Van Oostenryck >> <luc.vanoostenryck@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> >> > About the phi-sources, I agree strongly with this. To me these >> > phi-sources are just a nuisance. Once things will be in better >> > shape, I'll see what can be done to get rid of them (quite a bit >> > of the logic depends on them for the moment, though). >> > >> >> As you know the backend relies upon the phisrc instruction and treats >> it like a 'store' while treating the phi instructions as 'loads'. >> Selfishly I would like this to remain as it seems changing it is not >> necessary, but nice to have? > > Well, I'm not very sure about how you use these phisrc but from what > I've understood, in sparse-llvm it's done like this because LLVM's phi > can't be used *because* of the problems described here above. > If I remove these phisources, I would of course adapt sparse-llvm > to do the right thing. > Well I have alternative backend that does not have phi instructions. Which also makes me think now that maybe it is better to keep the introduction of phi instructions as a separate phase rather than doing this at the time of linearization. Regards Dibyendu -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-sparse" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
