Hmmm. Is this part of the on-the-fly register allocation technique? You seem to be implementing something else.
Marc
On 2010-07-24, at 4:51 PM, Erick Lavoie wrote:
In trying to add Fixed interval support on the register allocation algorithm, to preserve registers across call sites, I ran into a problem with our current representation.
Given a call instruction like this:
20: ... 22: (9) $t_9 = call $t_8, global, $t_7 continue call_cont 24: ...
I need to be able to express the fact that all registers will be used during a function call. The algorithm given in the paper expresses it by assigning a live range interval [22,23[ for all registers. They call this a fixed interval. This effectively forces all live values in registers to be spilled at a function call site, because their own live range intersect with the fixed interval.
However, given our current notation, I would say that 't_9' starts being live at 22, which intersects with the fixed interval of any of the registers. For the fixed interval to be used correctly, I would need to be able to express the fact that the return value live range starts right after the fixed interval ends, in this case $t_9 = [23,...[. I see it as a decoupling between the function call and the return value.
At this point, I don't know if this could have unintended consequences down the road and I would like your opinion on this.
Erick _______________________________________________ Tachyon-list mailing list Tachyon-list@iro.umontreal.ca https://webmail.iro.umontreal.ca/mailman/listinfo/tachyon-list