Make SLH lowering the last pass before Stack Allocation #794
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
bgregoir
previously approved these changes
May 13, 2024
sarranz
force-pushed
the
delay-slh-lowering
branch
from
4429577
to
6134abe
Compare
bgregoir
approved these changes
May 13, 2024
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
We need to put SLH lowering as late as possible so that the SCT checker can run as late as possible. In particular this means that it goes after propagate inline, which is important for the DOIT checker #736.
This introduces an annoyance, which is that propagate inline might introduce double negations (e.g. if we have
inline bool b = !x). These get solved later byassemble_condI believe. But the SLH pass does not understand them.I now use constant propagation in the SLH pass (before we kept the last condition we saw in the environment, now we keep the simplified version of it, and then before comparing we simplify the expression in the
update_msf).I believe this doesn't mean we accept more programs, since constant propagation was running on all expressions anyways. Furthermore I only use the propagation to checker whether two expressions evaluate to the same value, I don't change the code.
The SCT checker didn't change.