Repository navigation
JIT: inconsistent handling of GT_LCL_FLD in value numbering #12142
Description
See notes in dotnet/coreclr#22867.
Basically, entire stores are handled differently than entire reads, so that if there's a store followed by a load they get numbered differently. One would expect a certain symmetry in the following bits of code:
Seems like always modelling these accesses via selectors is prudent.
category:implementation
theme:value-numbering
skill-level:expert
cost:small
Activity
AndyAyersMS commentedon Feb 28, 2019
Have a prototype of this: ValueNumberLocalFieldEntireAccess-- doesn't lead to any fx diffs on its own, so likely we're not hitting cases of this yet. And result is largely the same when applied on top of dotnet/coreclr#22867; the only diff I see is in my test case. So maybe not high-priority.