This is the mail archive of the
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: Remove sel-sched?
- From: Bernd Schmidt <bschmidt at redhat dot com>
- To: Jeff Law <law at redhat dot com>, Andrey Belevantsev <abel at ispras dot ru>, "gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org" <gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org>
- Date: Thu, 14 Jan 2016 18:47:48 +0100
- Subject: Re: Remove sel-sched?
- Authentication-results: sourceware.org; auth=none
- References: <569696A5 dot 9000204 at redhat dot com> <56974947 dot 3060004 at ispras dot ru> <5697DA29 dot 3090404 at redhat dot com>
On 01/14/2016 06:26 PM, Jeff Law wrote:
I think the bigger question Bernd is asking here is whether or not it
makes sense to have multiple schedulers. In an ideal world we'd bake
them off select the best and deprecate/remove the others.
I didn't follow sel-sched development closely, so forgive me if the
questions are simplistic/naive, but what are the main benefits of
sel-sched and is it at a point (performance-wise) where it could
conceivably replace the aging haifa scheduler infrastructure?
I think haifa has the advantage in comprehensibility. It also has
features that are missing from sel-sched such as c6x delay slot and