Displaying 4 results from an estimated 4 matches for "canmovemibeforebundle".
2012 Jun 08
3
[LLVMdev] Instruction bundles before RA: Rematerialization
..., r1);/*
>
> */P0 = cmp (r0.new, r0);/*
>
> */}/*
>
> */ The r0.new means that the new value of r0 is used (reg file bypass
> in the same cycle). You can see all possible implications of this. To
> offload this mental logic to the back end, we need a utility of form
> CanMoveMIBeforeBundle(MI, BundleHeader)/ CanMoveMIAfterBundle(MI,
> BundleHeader)/ MoveMIBeforeBundle(MI, BundleHeader)/
> MoveMIAfterBundle(MI, BundleHeader). Calling this repeatedly should
> achieve desired effect -- remove what could be removed, and live what
> needs to remain bundled intact. The move...
2012 Jun 08
0
[LLVMdev] Instruction bundles before RA: Rematerialization
...= cmp (r0.new, r0);/*
>>
>> */}/*
>>
>> */The r0.new means that the new value of r0 is used (reg file bypass
>> in the same cycle). You can see all possible implications of this. To
>> offload this mental logic to the back end, we need a utility of form
>> CanMoveMIBeforeBundle(MI, BundleHeader)/ CanMoveMIAfterBundle(MI,
>> BundleHeader)/ MoveMIBeforeBundle(MI, BundleHeader)/
>> MoveMIAfterBundle(MI, BundleHeader). Calling this repeatedly should
>> achieve desired effect – remove what could be removed, and live what
>> needs to remain bundled intac...
2012 Jun 07
0
[LLVMdev] Instruction bundles before RA: Rematerialization
...al does need back end support. Example:
{
r0 = add (r0, r1);
P0 = cmp (r0.new, r0);
}
The r0.new means that the new value of r0 is used (reg file bypass in the
same cycle). You can see all possible implications of this. To offload this
mental logic to the back end, we need a utility of form
CanMoveMIBeforeBundle(MI, BundleHeader)/ CanMoveMIAfterBundle(MI,
BundleHeader)/ MoveMIBeforeBundle(MI, BundleHeader)/ MoveMIAfterBundle(MI,
BundleHeader). Calling this repeatedly should achieve desired effect -
remove what could be removed, and live what needs to remain bundled intact.
The move utility can change instr...
2012 Jun 07
2
[LLVMdev] Instruction bundles before RA: Rematerialization
On Jun 7, 2012, at 10:25 AM, "Sergei Larin" <slarin at codeaurora.org> wrote:
> Generally as far as I concern, there is no way “generic” (platform independent) code can add instructions to bundles optimally
I agree, there are too many ways of modeling stuff with bundles. That is why I took the philosophical stance of treating bundles as black boxes during RA. I think the