http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48673
--- Comment #6 from Bernd Schmidt <bernds at gcc dot gnu.org> 2011-05-06 12:09:32 UTC --- (In reply to comment #5) > Or schedule_block could have a mode of preserving the existing insn order, > which can also be useful for testing purposes. If this sounds like an > overkill, something like sel-sched.c:reset_sched_cycles_in_current_ebb could > be > adapted to work. This function feeds the bb insns to DFA but also follows the > old schedule w.r.t. to dependency latencies. Not having the old schedule > would > mean that we would honor only DFA latencies reflected in insn cycles and > TImodes, but this may be enough. That sounds fragile. The DFA is not sufficient to produce an accurate schedule on all targets. If SMS produces a schedule it might as well mark it with accurate uses of TImode.
