From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 27902 invoked by alias); 9 Jan 2003 17:17:28 -0000 Mailing-List: contact cgen-help@sources.redhat.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: cgen-owner@sources.redhat.com Received: (qmail 27881 invoked from network); 9 Jan 2003 17:17:26 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO touchme.toronto.redhat.com) (216.138.202.10) by 209.249.29.67 with SMTP; 9 Jan 2003 17:17:26 -0000 Received: from toenail.toronto.redhat.com (toenail.toronto.redhat.com [172.16.14.211]) by touchme.toronto.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 46A408000E7; Thu, 9 Jan 2003 12:17:15 -0500 (EST) Received: (from fche@localhost) by toenail.toronto.redhat.com (8.11.6/8.11.6) id h09HGtc24971; Thu, 9 Jan 2003 12:16:55 -0500 X-Authentication-Warning: toenail.toronto.redhat.com: fche set sender to fche@redhat.com using -f To: Doug Evans Cc: cgen@sources.redhat.com Subject: Re: exposed pipeline patch (long!) References: <15901.9079.191603.469002@casey.transmeta.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII From: fche@redhat.com (Frank Ch. Eigler) Date: Thu, 09 Jan 2003 17:17:00 -0000 In-Reply-To: <15901.9079.191603.469002@casey.transmeta.com> Message-ID: User-Agent: Gnus/5.0808 (Gnus v5.8.8) XEmacs/21.1 (Cuyahoga Valley) MIME-Version: 1.0 X-SW-Source: 2003-q1/txt/msg00011.txt.bz2 dje wrote: > Handling exposed pipelines can get really messy > when one takes bypass networks into account. ... right, which is why we don't model bypass networks at all in RTL. > Question: For the ports in question, are the delays ISA related > or implementation related? > If they're ISA related then specifying the delays in rtl is appropriate. > [...] That's right. > One way to go would be to specify the hazards independently of the rtl. Right, and to some extent, the cgen "model" machinery may enable this. They are orthogonal animals. - FChE