Ayal Zaks ayal.z...@gmail.com writes:
The issue of assigning stages to reg-moves is mostly relevant for
prolog and epilog generation, which requires and receives special
attention -- handled very nicely by ps_num_consecutive_stages! Note
that currently a simple boolean indicator for (the
Ayal Zaks ayal.z...@gmail.com writes:
I agree it's natural to schedule moves for intra-iteration dependencies
in the normal get_sched_window way. But suppose we have a dependency:
A --(T,N,1)-- B
that requires two moves M1 and M2. If we think in terms of cycles
(in the SCHED_TIME
On Mon, Oct 10, 2011 at 1:57 PM, Richard Sandiford
richard.sandif...@linaro.org wrote:
Ayal Zaks ayal.z...@gmail.com writes:
I agree it's natural to schedule moves for intra-iteration dependencies
in the normal get_sched_window way. But suppose we have a dependency:
A --(T,N,1)-- B
that
On Wed, Sep 28, 2011 at 4:49 PM, Richard Sandiford
richard.sandif...@linaro.org wrote:
Ayal Zaks ayal.z...@gmail.com writes:
+ /* The cyclic lifetime of move-new_reg starts and ends at move-def
+ (the instruction that defines move-old_reg).
So instruction I_REG_MOVE (new_reg=reg)
Ayal Zaks ayal.z...@gmail.com writes:
+ /* The cyclic lifetime of move-new_reg starts and ends at move-def
+ (the instruction that defines move-old_reg).
So instruction I_REG_MOVE (new_reg=reg) must be scheduled before the
next I_MUST_FOLLOW move/original-def (due to
Richard Sandiford richard.sandif...@linaro.org wrote on 30/08/2011
03:29:26 PM:
From: Richard Sandiford richard.sandif...@linaro.org
To: gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
Cc: Ayal Zaks/Haifa/IBM@IBMIL
Date: 30/08/2011 03:29 PM
Subject: [4/4] Make SMS schedule register moves
This is the move
PM
Subject: [4/4] Make SMS schedule register moves
This is the move-scheduling patch itself. It should be fairly
self-explanatory. Let me know if it isn't, and I'll try to improve
the commentary.
One potentially controversial change is to the way we handle moves
in the prologue
This is the move-scheduling patch itself. It should be fairly
self-explanatory. Let me know if it isn't, and I'll try to improve
the commentary.
One potentially controversial change is to the way we handle moves
in the prologue and epilogue. The current code uses a conservative
check to decide
On Tue, Aug 30, 2011 at 2:29 PM, Richard Sandiford
richard.sandif...@linaro.org wrote:
This is the move-scheduling patch itself. It should be fairly
self-explanatory. Let me know if it isn't, and I'll try to improve
the commentary.
Can you add some testcases?
Thanks,
Richard.
One
Richard Guenther richard.guent...@gmail.com writes:
On Tue, Aug 30, 2011 at 2:29 PM, Richard Sandiford
richard.sandif...@linaro.org wrote:
This is the move-scheduling patch itself. It should be fairly
self-explanatory. Let me know if it isn't, and I'll try to improve
the commentary.
Can
On Tue, Aug 30, 2011 at 2:43 PM, Richard Sandiford
richard.sandif...@linaro.org wrote:
Richard Guenther richard.guent...@gmail.com writes:
On Tue, Aug 30, 2011 at 2:29 PM, Richard Sandiford
richard.sandif...@linaro.org wrote:
This is the move-scheduling patch itself. It should be fairly
Richard Guenther richard.guent...@gmail.com writes:
On Tue, Aug 30, 2011 at 2:43 PM, Richard Sandiford
richard.sandif...@linaro.org wrote:
Richard Guenther richard.guent...@gmail.com writes:
On Tue, Aug 30, 2011 at 2:29 PM, Richard Sandiford
richard.sandif...@linaro.org wrote:
This is the
12 matches
Mail list logo
