wangpc-pp wrote: > Please reorganize the patch as @dtcxzyw suggested. :-) > > I didn't notice this extension before, so I may not be asking the right > question here: These MOPs can be redefined, then, are we able to schedule > them in compiler? Becase we don't know the cost of MOPs if we don't know how > MOPs are used. For example, MOPs can be redefined as simple ALU instructions, > or, it can be instructions with large cost like DIV/REM. I don't know how to > model it now, but I don't think defining Sched resources for MOPs is the > right way.
Just checked similar extensions in ARM (like AUT, PAC, BTI, etc.), these extensions are defined in NOP encoding space and their schedule resources will be overrided by `InstRW`. https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/74824 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
