> Vladimir Yanovsky wrote: > > That comment was about SMS. Last time when I tried SMS for Itanium on > SPEC2000 a few monts ago, a lot of tests did not work. As RCSP I don't > think we need this. It is too complicated algorithm. Mainstream > approach is modulo scheduling. I hope people from ISP RAS will > implement enhanced software pipleining (as part of their new insn > scheduler) as a complimentary software pipelining algorithm for loops > with branches. > > Imho the big problem of implementing software pipelining in gcc > environment is passes working after the MS and changing the pipelined > code. SMS is actually good for gcc because it makes register allocator > changes (when register pressure is high) is less frequent. > Unfortunately reload (ant other subsequent passes) does other > transformations too (not only spilling registers when the pressure is > high). But as Dorit wrote in her email SMS works well at least for PPC. >
just for the record - I was actually referring to the Cell SPU (which is not a PPC architecture). dorit > > > >> We also plan to fix swing modulo scheduling to make it work on ia64 > >> and improve it by propagating data dependency information to RTL. We > >> plan to discuss this project on the GCC mailing list in a few weeks. > > > > > > > >
