Initial revision
This commit is contained in:
79
doc/ego/cf/cf5
Normal file
79
doc/ego/cf/cf5
Normal file
@@ -0,0 +1,79 @@
|
||||
.NH 2
|
||||
Interprocedural analysis
|
||||
.PP
|
||||
It is often desirable to know the effects
|
||||
a procedure call may have.
|
||||
The optimization below is only possible if
|
||||
we know for sure that the call to P cannot
|
||||
change A.
|
||||
.DS
|
||||
A := 10; A:= 10;
|
||||
P; -- procedure call --> P;
|
||||
B := A + 2; B := 12;
|
||||
.DE
|
||||
Although it is not possible to predict exactly
|
||||
all the effects a procedure call has, we may
|
||||
determine a kind of upper bound for it.
|
||||
So we compute all variables that may be
|
||||
changed by P, although they need not be
|
||||
changed at every invocation of P.
|
||||
We can get hold of this set by just looking
|
||||
at all assignment (store) instructions
|
||||
in the body of P.
|
||||
EM also has a set of \fIindirect\fR assignment
|
||||
instructions,
|
||||
i.e. assignment through a pointer variable.
|
||||
In general, it is not possible to determine
|
||||
which variable is affected by such an assignment.
|
||||
In these cases, we just record the fact that P
|
||||
does an indirect assignment.
|
||||
Note that this does not mean that all variables
|
||||
are potentially affected, as the front ends
|
||||
may generate messages telling that certain
|
||||
variables can never be accessed indirectly.
|
||||
We also set a flag if P does a use (load) indirect.
|
||||
Note that we only have to look at \fIglobal\fR
|
||||
variables.
|
||||
If P changes or uses any of its locals,
|
||||
this has no effect on its environment.
|
||||
Local variables of a lexically enclosing
|
||||
procedure can only be accessed indirectly.
|
||||
.PP
|
||||
A procedure P may of course call another procedure.
|
||||
To determine the effects of a call to P,
|
||||
we also must know the effects of a call to the second procedure.
|
||||
This second one may call a third one, and so on.
|
||||
Effectively, we need to compute the \fItransitive closure\fR
|
||||
of the effects.
|
||||
To do this, we determine for every procedure
|
||||
which other procedures it calls.
|
||||
This set is the "calling" attribute of a procedure.
|
||||
One may regard all these sets as a conceptual graph,
|
||||
in which there is an edge from P to Q
|
||||
if Q is in the calling set of P. This graph will
|
||||
be referred to as the \fIcall graph\fR.
|
||||
(Note the resemblance with the control flow graph).
|
||||
.PP
|
||||
We can detect which procedures are called by P
|
||||
by looking at all CAL instructions in its body.
|
||||
Unfortunately, a procedure may also be
|
||||
called indirectly, via a CAI instruction.
|
||||
Yet, only procedures that are used as operand of an LPI
|
||||
instruction can be called indirect,
|
||||
because this is the only way to take the address of a procedure.
|
||||
We determine for every procedure whether it does
|
||||
a CAI instruction.
|
||||
We also build a set of all procedures used as
|
||||
operand of an LPI.
|
||||
.sp
|
||||
After all procedures have been processed (i.e. all CFGs
|
||||
are constructed, all loops are detected,
|
||||
all procedures are analyzed to see which variables
|
||||
they may change, which procedures they call,
|
||||
whether they do a CAI or are used in an LPI) the
|
||||
transitive closure of all interprocedural
|
||||
information is computed.
|
||||
During the same process,
|
||||
the calling set of every procedure that uses a CAI
|
||||
is extended with the above mentioned set of all
|
||||
procedures that can be called indirect.
|
||||
Reference in New Issue
Block a user