This is the mail archive of the
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: An unusual Performance approach using Synthetic registers, and a request for guidance.
On Friday 27 December 2002 10:07 pm, Alexandre Oliva wrote:
> On Dec 27, 2002, "Michael S. Zick" <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
> > So, I think (personal opinion here), using the %EBX register as the base
> > (frame pointer) of the synthetic register frames should be your first
> > choice.
> 'cept %EBX is used as the PIC base register, and you can't really
> remap that to a virtual register unless you change PLT entries.
Indeed, that could well present a technical challenge.
Depends on how the question behind the project is approached.
For the general question:
"If a complex instruction set machine had as many registers as
a RISC machine, what..."
I see two approachs to investigating this sort of question;
1) Modify the compiler to support, in general, Synthetic Register Arrays.
Wherein one could/would butt heads with any and all current design
decisions for a particular port....
2) Do a "new port" to a Synthetic Machine that 99% maps to real hardware,
leaving the compiler internals untouched.
You get to make your own design decisions that way and perhaps learn
if path (1) above is worth doing.