Ayal Zaks ayal.z...@gmail.com writes:
So instead of navigating directly from
ps_insn-ddg_node-node_sched_params, we now use indices and lookup
pointees in ddg_node and node_sched_params arrays. A bit of a
nuisance, but it's ok with me.
Well, IMO, ps_insn-ddg_node-node_sched_params is the same
2011/9/13 Richard Sandiford richard.sandif...@linaro.org
Ayal Zaks ayal.z...@gmail.com writes:
So instead of navigating directly from
ps_insn-ddg_node-node_sched_params, we now use indices and lookup
pointees in ddg_node and node_sched_params arrays. A bit of a
nuisance, but it's ok with
Richard Sandiford richard.sandif...@linaro.org wrote on 30/08/2011
03:03:59 PM:
From: Richard Sandiford richard.sandif...@linaro.org
To: gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
Cc: Ayal Zaks/Haifa/IBM@IBMIL
Date: 30/08/2011 03:05 PM
Subject: [2/4] SMS: Use ids to represent ps_insns
Instructions
Instructions in a partial schedule are currently represented as a
ddg node. This patch uses a more abstract id instead. At the moment,
the ids map directly to ddg nodes, but the next patch will add register
moves to the end.
One slight advantage of using ids is that we can leave the ASAP value
