"Amker.Cheng" <amker.ch...@gmail.com> writes: > In function new_ready, it calls to min_insn_conflict_delay with > "min_insn_conflict_delay (curr_state, next, next)". > But the function's comments say that it returns minimal delay of issue of > the 2nd insn after issuing the 1st in given state. > Why the last two parameter for the call are both "next"? > seems conflict with the comments.
This change dates back to the first DFA scheduler patch. It does seem a little odd, particularly as the call in new_ready is the only use of min_insn_conflict_delay. CC'ing vmakarov in case he remembers anything about this old code. Ian
