> Cheng, can you explain what lead you to this "discovery", and what
> you're trying to achieve?
Thanks for all your enthusiastic explanation.
Well, we are now trying to find our processor's critical timing path
by running it at higher frequency than it was designed for.
One timing prob we found i
On Fri, Apr 2, 2010 at 4:26 PM, Jeff Law wrote:
> On 04/02/10 05:26, Steven Bosscher wrote:
>>
>> Yes. The CFG is constructed on GIMPLE and then maintained all the way
>> through to reorg.c (or actually pass_free_cfg). Once destroyed, we
>> cannot resurrect the CFG.
>>
>> In a perfect world, reorg
On 04/02/10 05:26, Steven Bosscher wrote:
Yes. The CFG is constructed on GIMPLE and then maintained all the way
through to reorg.c (or actually pass_free_cfg). Once destroyed, we
cannot resurrect the CFG.
In a perfect world, reorg.c would get a rewrite and we'd maintain the
CFG all the way thro
On Fri, Apr 2, 2010 at 12:41 PM, Amker.Cheng wrote:
>> The CFG is not maintained during delay slot scheduling. This is, in
>> fact, a very old and well-known problem. Look for any e-mail on this
>> list that mentions reorg.c :-)
>>
> Thanks, further more , It seems cfg are not maintained after del
On Fri, Apr 2, 2010 at 11:28 AM, Amker.Cheng wrote:
> Hi :
> I'm wondering whether cfg is maintained properly during delay slot
> scheduling,
The CFG is not maintained during delay slot scheduling. This is, in
fact, a very old and well-known problem. Look for any e-mail on this
list that mentio
