Skip to content
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

[AIE] Phi nodes need not be dominated #194

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Sep 27, 2024

Conversation

martien-de-jong
Copy link
Collaborator

The original safety test for a PTRADD LD/ST postinc combine was overly conservative.

andcarminati
andcarminati previously approved these changes Sep 26, 2024
Copy link
Collaborator

@andcarminati andcarminati left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

LGTM.

(PtrAddUse.getParent() != AddrUse.getParent() ||
Helper.dominates(MemI, PtrAddUse) ||
Helper.dominates(PtrAddUse, AddrUse));
});
Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Discussed offline, ultimately, what we want to check is that there is no use of the address in between the two instructions, because those will get combined in a single one. Maybe define a IsBetweenOps lambda and simplify the long comment above?

@martien-de-jong martien-de-jong enabled auto-merge (rebase) September 27, 2024 09:33
Dominance checks don't apply to phi nodes.  Ultimately we want to know whether
we can move the two instructions together without breaking a dependence.

Outline a complicated condition

Also some clang-tidy issues.
@martien-de-jong martien-de-jong merged commit fc44e76 into aie-public Sep 27, 2024
8 checks passed
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants