From: Richard Sandiford <richard.sandiford@linaro.org>
To: gcc@gcc.gnu.org
Cc: zaks@il.ibm.com, eres@il.ibm.com
Subject: Question about SMS scheduling windows
Date: Wed, 27 Jul 2011 10:21:00 -0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <g4wrf4rq32.fsf@linaro.org> (raw)
I've been looking at SMS, and have a question about get_sched_window.
When there are previously-scheduled predessors, we use:
if (e->data_type == MEM_DEP)
end = MIN (end, SCHED_TIME (v_node) + ii - 1);
to get an upper bound on the scheduling window that is permitted
by memory dependencies. I think this:
SCHED_TIME (v_node) + ii - 1
is an inclusive bound, in that scheduling the node at that time
would not break the memory dependence, whereas scheduling at
SCHED_TIME (v_node) would. Is that right?
I ask because in the final range:
start = early_start;
end = MIN (end, early_start + ii);
/* Schedule the node close to it's predecessors. */
step = 1;
END is an exclusive bound. It seems like we might be double-counting here,
and effectively limiting the schedule to SCHED_TIME (v_node) + ii - 2.
While I'm here, I was also curious about:
/* If there are more successors than predecessors schedule the
node close to it's successors. */
if (count_succs >= count_preds)
{
int old_start = start;
start = end - 1;
end = old_start - 1;
step = -1;
}
This doesn't seem to be in the paper, and the comment suggests
"count_succs > count_preds" rather than "count_succs >= count_preds".
Is the ">=" vs ">" important?
Thanks,
Richard
next reply other threads:[~2011-07-27 10:11 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 9+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2011-07-27 10:21 Richard Sandiford [this message]
2011-07-27 13:34 ` Richard Sandiford
2011-07-27 13:40 ` Revital1 Eres
2011-07-27 16:42 ` Ayal Zaks
2011-08-04 9:03 ` Richard Sandiford
2011-08-04 16:27 ` Ayal Zaks
2011-08-08 9:30 ` Richard Sandiford
2011-08-08 19:36 ` Ayal Zaks
2011-08-09 11:19 ` Richard Sandiford
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=g4wrf4rq32.fsf@linaro.org \
--to=richard.sandiford@linaro.org \
--cc=eres@il.ibm.com \
--cc=gcc@gcc.gnu.org \
--cc=zaks@il.ibm.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).