Sorry for the typo error. I meant exits instead of exists. The below is corrected.
The Cost Calculation for a candidate to Spill in the Integrated Register Allocator(IRA) considers only the SESE regions. The Cost Calculation in the IRA should consider the SEME regions into consideration for spilling decisions. The Cost associated with the path that has un-matured exits should be less, thus making the more chances of spilling decision In the path of un-matured exits. The path that has normal exit should be having a higher cost than the cost of un-matured exit and Spilling decisions has to made accordingly in order to spill inside the less frequency path with the un-matured exits than the high frequency Path with the normal exits. I would like to propose the above for consideration of cost associated with SEME regions in IRA. Thoughts? Thanks & Regards Ajit -----Original Message----- From: Ajit Kumar Agarwal Sent: Thursday, July 02, 2015 3:33 PM To: vmaka...@redhat.com; l...@redhat.com; gcc@gcc.gnu.org Cc: Vinod Kathail; Shail Aditya Gupta; Vidhumouli Hunsigida; Nagaraju Mekala Subject: Consideration of Cost associated with SEME regions. All: The Cost Calculation for a candidate to Spill in the Integrated Register Allocator(IRA) considers only the SESE regions. The Cost Calculation in the IRA should consider the SEME regions into consider for spilling decisions. The Cost associated with the path that has un-matured exists should be less, thus making the more chances of spilling decision In the path of un-matured exits. The path that has un-matured (normal )exists should be having a higher cost than the cost of un-matured exists and Spilling decisions has to made accordingly in order to spill inside the less frequency path with the un-matured exists than the high frequency Path with the normal exits. I would like to propose the above for consideration of cost associated with SEME regions in IRA. Thoughts? Thanks & Regards Ajit
