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]

query automaton


Hello,
Some time ago I asked a question regarding the possibility to schedule an operation on alternative functional units (FUs) AND depending on the chosen FUs to generate a dedicated assembly mnemonic. 

To give a simple example suppose I have a move operation that can be issued on one of the 2 different FUs:

(define_reservation "si_move""(q_salu, r_salu_rp,r_salu + r_salu_r_wp)
		           |(q_smac, nothing,  r_smac + r_smac_wp) 
			  ,nothing* 3") 

Depending on the occupied FUs one of the following assembly instructions are generated: move_salu or move_smac.
 
To find out which FUs were occupied I defined 2 query_cpu_unit-s:
(define_query_cpu_unit "q_salu"	 "aut1")
(define_query_cpu_unit "q_smac"	 "aut1")

,which further on (during the sched2 hook TARGET_SCHED_DFA_NEW_CYCLE) are used to find out which of the 2 alternative reservations the automaton has taken. Based on this decision I add some information within the insn rtx which later on is used to dump "move_salu" or "move_smac".

This approach was successful as long as the units claimed by "si_move" belong to one and the same automaton ( i.e., q_salu, q_smac, r_salu_rp, r_salu, r_salu_r_wp, r_smac, r_smac_wp belong to "aut1").

If I try to split "aut1" into (lets say 2) automatons I get generated incorrect code (i.e., the choice of choosing the proper unit is not correct anymore.) 

QUESTION: Is there such constraint that the units part of the alternatives of a reservation must belong to the same automaton?


      


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