Hi all,
In the end I modified TARGET_SCHED_ADJUST_COST to increase the cost of
anti-dependencies between a jump and another instruction, to prevent
them from being scheduled in the same cycle. This fix works well. It
still allows other independent instructions to be scheduled into the
same VL
Daniel Towner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I maintain a port for a 16-bit VLIW machine, and I have encountered a
> problem with the DFA instruction scheduler. Consider the following two
> instructions:
>
> BNE someLabel
> STW R5,(R3) 0 // Mem[R3] := R5
>
> The second instruction will only be e
On Thu, Sep 01, 2005 at 11:12:51AM +0100, Daniel Towner wrote:
> Why is an anti-dependence used to enforce the ordering of the branch and
> the subsequent instruction?
Because gcc doesn't target true vliw machines, and given strict
program ordering of insn, anti-dependence is correct.
> ... and
Hi all,
I maintain a port for a 16-bit VLIW machine, and I have encountered a
problem with the DFA instruction scheduler. Consider the following two
instructions:
BNE someLabel
STW R5,(R3) 0 // Mem[R3] := R5
The second instruction will only be executed if the branch isn't taken.
However, w
