This is the mail archive of the
gcc@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: IA-64 speculation patches have bad impact on ARM
- From: Daniel Jacobowitz <drow at false dot org>
- To: Paolo Bonzini <paolo dot bonzini at lu dot unisi dot ch>
- Cc: Maxim Kuvyrkov <mkuvyrkov at ispras dot ru>, GCC Development <gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org>
- Date: Tue, 30 May 2006 14:59:57 -0400
- Subject: Re: IA-64 speculation patches have bad impact on ARM
- References: <447C95B5.7030908@lu.unisi.ch>
On Tue, May 30, 2006 at 08:57:57PM +0200, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
> int
> default_reorder2 (FILE *dump ATTRIBUTE_UNUSED,
> int sched_verbose ATTRIBUTE_UNUSED,
> rtx *ready, int *pn_ready,
> int clock_var ATTRIBUTE_UNUSED)
> {
> int n_ready = *pn_ready;
>
> /* This is correct for sched-rgn.c only. */
> if (reload_completed
> && (flag_sched2_use_superblocks || flag_sched2_use_traces))
> return 0;
>
> if (n_ready > 1)
> {
> basic_block bb = BLOCK_FOR_INSN (current_sched_info->prev_head);
>
> if (BLOCK_FOR_INSN (ready[n_ready - 1]) != bb)
> {
> int i;
>
> for (i = n_ready - 1; i >= 0; i--)
> {
> rtx insn = ready[i];
>
> if (BLOCK_FOR_INSN (insn) != bb)
> continue;
>
> memcpy (ready + i, ready + i + 1,
> (n_ready - i - 1) * sizeof (*ready));
> ready[n_ready - 1] = insn;
> break;
> }
> }
> }
>
> return 0;
> }
Not even a single comment - shame on you both! :-) If this is the
solution we choose, can we make sure that there's at least a comment
explaining what's going on?
--
Daniel Jacobowitz
CodeSourcery