Allow deleting any kind of nodes after address mode formation #77872
Conversation
dotnet-issue-labeler
bot
added
the
area-CodeGen-coreclr
|
Tagging subscribers to this area: @JulieLeeMSFT, @jakobbotsch Issue DetailsThis is a general solution to #77152, allowing for deleting any set of nodes that contributed to an address mode, especially those nodes on the Note that for the #77152 case, this deletes all the Fixes #77152.
|
| { | ||
| JITDUMP("Removing unused node:\n "); | ||
| DISPNODE(unused); | ||
|
|
||
| BlockRange().Remove(unused); | ||
|
|
||
| if (unused->OperIs(GT_ADD, GT_MUL, GT_LSH)) | ||
| for (GenTree* operand : unused->Operands()) | ||
| { |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Maybe add DEBUG_DESTROY_NODE(unused); after the for loop?
|
@AndyAyersMS Do you think this is the "better" solution over the "targeted" (maybe: hack?) #77871? |
Yes. |
|
No diffs, about 0.01% throughput regression |
This is a general solution to dotnet#77152, allowing for deleting any set of nodes that contributed to an address mode, especially those nodes on the `op1` side of a GT_MUL with a zero `op2`. Note that for the dotnet#77152 case, this deletes all the `op1` nodes, but leaves behind a dead temp var that was created as part of long MUL rationalization. Fixes dotnet#77152.
BruceForstall
force-pushed
the
Fix77152General
branch
from
b86c8ad to
867fd64
Compare
ghost
locked as resolved and limited conversation to collaborators
This is a general solution to #77152, allowing for deleting any set of nodes that contributed to an address mode, especially those nodes on the
op1side of a GT_MUL with a zeroop2.Note that for the #77152 case, this deletes all the
op1nodes, but leaves behind a dead temp var that was created as part of long MUL rationalization.Fixes #77152.