From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: "Frank Ch. Eigler" To: matthew green Cc: cgen@sources.redhat.com Subject: Re: generalizing the delay rtx function Date: Wed, 14 Mar 2001 05:05:00 -0000 Message-id: <20010314080539.K32628@redhat.com> References: <20010308160106.A28162@redhat.com> <20859.984555605@cygnus.com> X-SW-Source: 2001-q1/msg00159.html Hi - On Wed, Mar 14, 2001 at 06:40:05PM +1100, matthew green wrote: : [...] : is this possible? eg, (sparc) if i do: : : ba foo : ld [%l1 + 4], %o0 : vs. : ba foo : tst %o0 : : the load can take *much* longer than the tst? I'm not sure I guess correctly at your point; is it that these two code sequences require a different number of clock cycles to run on a SPARC chip? If so, yes, but the delay is not a programmer-visible one, so the proposed extensions to the delay rtx would not be used to model it. - FChE -- -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.0.4 (GNU/Linux) Comment: For info see http://www.gnupg.org iD8DBQE6r2yjVZbdDOm/ZT0RAlXlAJwJO/CGR9B8l6z2Lh3FLpYnUtwwdQCfSHmo SgzwbSjByhZ4D82MjfRlDeU= =LVMc -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----