search for: schedboundary

...-- to hold a copy the scheduler's state, in order to implement a really trivial (and really inefficient) backtracking mechanism. This approach leads to a subtle "segmentation fault", when the pass ends and invokes the deleter. The reason of the fault is due to the custom deleter of SchedBoundary, which explicitly deletes the scoreboard object. Follows that, since both the boundary objects, the original and the copy, hold  a pointer to the same object, a double "delete" is performed. I think this is an issue deriving from the design: if SchedBoundary is designed to be copiable, t...

...9;, I have got error messages like below. llvm/lib/CodeGen/MachineRegisterInfo.cpp:462:67: error: no ‘void llvm::MachineRegisterInfo::dumpUses(unsigned int) const’ member function declared in class ‘llvm::MachineRegisterInfo’ llvm/lib/CodeGen/MachineScheduler.cpp:2331:57: error: no ‘void llvm::SchedBoundary::dumpScheduledState()’ member function declared in class ‘llvm::SchedBoundary’ ... It seems the "defined(LLVM_ENABLE_DUMP)" is needed on several locations. How do you think about it? I have attached the diff file about the locations for reference. If I missed something, please let m...

...e below. >> >> llvm/lib/CodeGen/MachineRegisterInfo.cpp:462:67: error: no ‘void llvm::MachineRegisterInfo::dumpUses(unsigned int) const’ member function declared in class ‘llvm::MachineRegisterInfo’ >> >> llvm/lib/CodeGen/MachineScheduler.cpp:2331:57: error: no ‘void llvm::SchedBoundary::dumpScheduledState()’ member function declared in class ‘llvm::SchedBoundary’ >> >> ... >> >> It seems the "defined(LLVM_ENABLE_DUMP)" is needed on several locations. How do you think about it? I have attached the diff file about the locations for reference. If...

...n/MachineRegisterInfo.cpp:462:67: error: no ‘void >> llvm::MachineRegisterInfo::dumpUses(unsigned int) const’ member function >> declared in class ‘llvm::MachineRegisterInfo’ >>>> >>>> llvm/lib/CodeGen/MachineScheduler.cpp:2331:57: error: no ‘void >> llvm::SchedBoundary::dumpScheduledState()’ member function declared in >> class ‘llvm::SchedBoundary’ >>>> >>>> ... >>>> >>>> It seems the "defined(LLVM_ENABLE_DUMP)" is needed on several >> locations. How do you think about it? I have attached th...

...no ‘void >>>> llvm::MachineRegisterInfo::dumpUses(unsigned int) const’ member function >>>> declared in class ‘llvm::MachineRegisterInfo’ >>>>>> >>>>>> llvm/lib/CodeGen/MachineScheduler.cpp:2331:57: error: no ‘void >>>> llvm::SchedBoundary::dumpScheduledState()’ member function declared in >>>> class ‘llvm::SchedBoundary’ >>>>>> >>>>>> ... >>>>>> >>>>>> It seems the "defined(LLVM_ENABLE_DUMP)" is needed on several >>>> location...

...pUses(unsigned int) const’ member >>>>>> function >>>>>> declared in class ‘llvm::MachineRegisterInfo’ >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> llvm/lib/CodeGen/MachineScheduler.cpp:2331:57: error: no ‘void >>>>>> llvm::SchedBoundary::dumpScheduledState()’ member function >>>>>> declared in >>>>>> class ‘llvm::SchedBoundary’ >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> ... >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> It seems the "defined(LLVM_E...

Hi Andrew, I seem to be making good progress on the P5600 scheduler using the new machine model but I've got a few questions about it. How would you represent an instruction that splits into two micro-ops and is dispatched to two different reservation stations? For example, I have two reservation stations (AGQ and FPQ). An FPU load instruction is split into a load micro-op which is

...to their own strategy, add heuristics and change the underlying data structures, which often makes sense. You can decide whether you want only bottom-up, top-down, or both. For an in-order processor, I think this becomes much simpler. You do away with most of the complexity in ConvergingScheduler::SchedBoundary and implement a straightforward reservation table. If it’s fully pipelined then you just count resource units for the current cycle until one reaches the latency factor. If it’s not fully pipelined, then you need to define ResourceCycles in the machine’s SchedWrite definitions and implement a simpl...

Hi, I'm working on defining a SchedMachineModel for the Southern Islands family of GPUs, and I have two questions related to the MachineScheduler. 1. I have a resource that can process 15 instructions at the same time. In the TableGen definitions, should I do: def HWVMEM : ProcResource<15>; or let BufferSize = 15 in { def HWVMEM : ProcResource<1>; } 2. Southern Islands has

> > Of course, you want to duplicate as little of the generic scheduling logic > as you can. So I think the challenge is how to expose the > generic scheduler's functionality as a base class or composition of > utilities so that defining your strategy doesn't require too much > copy-paste. ​Isn't GCNMaxOccupancySchedStrategy [1] already an example on using

...resource appears to be used // serially, rather than multiple parallel uses. This is important for // in-order machine where the resource consumption is a hazard. But we could do also add a delay to the resource cycles when the the processor resource is unbuffered. - The code in SchedBoundary::bumpNode and SchedBoundary::checkHazard needs to be updated to increment the cycle accounting for DelayCycles. -Andy -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/attachments/20140128/76c69b5b/attachment.html> --...

> On Aug 3, 2015, at 10:24 AM, Chris Bieneman <beanz at apple.com> wrote: > > Hey Tom, > > I’m not a regular user of llvm-config, but this sounds completely right to me, and it would be a significant improvement over what we have now. > > The only question I want to raise is, what about NDEBUG? There are headers that conditionalize on NDEBUG, which could lead to ABI