2011/9/13 Richard Sandiford
>
> Ayal Zaks writes:
> > So instead of navigating directly from
> > ps_insn->ddg_node->node_sched_params, we now use indices and lookup
> > pointees in ddg_node and node_sched_params arrays. A bit of a
> > nuisance, but it's ok with me.
>
> Well, IMO, ps_insn->ddg_nod
Ayal Zaks writes:
> So instead of navigating directly from
> ps_insn->ddg_node->node_sched_params, we now use indices and lookup
> pointees in ddg_node and node_sched_params arrays. A bit of a
> nuisance, but it's ok with me.
Well, IMO, ps_insn->ddg_node->node_sched_params is the same amount
of i
Richard Sandiford wrote on 30/08/2011
03:03:59 PM:
> From: Richard Sandiford
> To: gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
> Cc: Ayal Zaks/Haifa/IBM@IBMIL
> Date: 30/08/2011 03:05 PM
> Subject: [2/4] SMS: Use ids to represent ps_insns
>
> Instructions in a partial schedule are curre
Instructions in a partial schedule are currently represented as a
ddg node. This patch uses a more abstract id instead. At the moment,
the ids map directly to ddg nodes, but the next patch will add register
moves to the end.
One slight advantage of using ids is that we can leave the ASAP value
o
