This is the mail archive of the gcc@gcc.gnu.org mailing list for the GCC project.

Index Nav:	[Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav:	[Date Prev] [Date Next]	[Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
Other format:	[Raw text]

Re: impact of -minsert-sched-nops

From: David Edelsohn <dje at watson dot ibm dot com>
To: Jack Howarth <howarth at bromo dot med dot uc dot edu>
Cc: gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org
Date: Mon, 24 Nov 2003 15:54:08 -0500
Subject: Re: impact of -minsert-sched-nops
References: <200311241926.OAA40832@bromo.msbb.uc.edu> <200311242046.PAA42226@bromo.msbb.uc.edu>

>>>>> Jack Howarth writes:

Jack> Well, as I understood it, the -minsert-sched-nops feature could be
Jack> enabled through either -mcpu=970 or -mcpu=G5 or -mcpu=power4 (which
Jack> would make the code G5 specific) or just through -minsert-sched-nops
Jack> which would limit the change to that optimization leaving the code
Jack> G4 compatible. Or am I missing something here?

	-minsert-sched-nops *always* is compatible.

	The issue is what heuristic should GCC use to insert nops if it
doesn't know it's targeting G5/POWER4?  G4 doesn't have group dispatch
restrictions. 

David

Follow-Ups:
- Re: impact of -minsert-sched-nops
  - From: Geoff Keating

References:
- impact of -minsert-sched-nops
  - From: Jack Howarth
- Re: impact of -minsert-sched-nops
  - From: Jack Howarth

Index Nav:	[Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav:	[Date Prev] [Date Next]	[Thread Prev] [Thread Next]