Re: SSA without phi

Tommy Thorn <tommy.thorn@gmail.com>
8 May 2007 17:45:15 -0700

          From comp.compilers
Related articles
[4 earlier articles]
Re: SSA without phi cfc@shell01.TheWorld.com (Chris F Clark) (2007-04-23)
Re: SSA without phi find@my.address.elsewhere (Matthias Blume) (2007-04-26)
Re: SSA without phi Nicolas.Capens@gmail.com (2007-04-29)
Re: SSA without phi tommy.thorn@gmail.com (Tommy Thorn) (2007-05-04)
Re: SSA without phi jle@forest.owlnet.rice.edu (2007-05-04)
Re: SSA without phi inderaj@gmail.com (Inderaj Bains) (2007-05-07)
Re: SSA without phi tommy.thorn@gmail.com (Tommy Thorn) (2007-05-08)
Re: SSA without phi Nicolas.Capens@gmail.com (2007-05-22)
| List of all articles for this month |
From: Tommy Thorn <tommy.thorn@gmail.com>
Newsgroups: comp.compilers
Date: 8 May 2007 17:45:15 -0700
Organization: Compilers Central
References: 07-04-07507-04-152 07-05-004 07-05-027
Keywords: SSA, analysis
Posted-Date: 09 May 2007 13:39:36 EDT

On May 7, 1:44 pm, "Inderaj Bains" <inde...@gmail.com> wrote:
> That is incorrect. Leaving SSA does not require register allocation,
> renaming plus color-out can guarantee dropping remaining names is
> correct.


That is the same as register allocation for an unbounded set of
registers. I'm not sure why you mean by "color-out", but you'd have to
track liveness and conflicts to accomplish the renaming at which point
you're very close to a full allocator.


My main point was that just dropping the subscripts doesn't work.


> Also retaining some names can be very useful for a production
> compiler for debugging purposes


Certainly.


Tommy


Post a followup to this message

Return to the comp.compilers page.
Search the comp.compilers archives again.