Currently working at the Samsung Austin R&D Center on the Samsung next generation ARM cores.
- User Since
- Jan 5 2016, 9:21 AM (153 w, 2 d)
Mon, Dec 10
Thu, Dec 6
Sorry, I was juggling too many patches out of order.
Note that I made this patch a predecessor for D55345.
Rebase the patch.
Wed, Dec 5
Mon, Dec 3
Fri, Nov 30
I'm all for reusing code, but this is not any sophisticated algorithm, but mere streaming of data. I rather keep the additional methods and simplify the exiting ones to eliminate their special cases for the sake of maintenance. After all, complicating them is what resulted in this issue.
Thu, Nov 29
Tue, Nov 27
Mon, Nov 26
Fri, Nov 23
Wed, Nov 21
Break up the original patch in 3 installments, one for each existing predicate: AArch64InstrInfo::isScaledAddr(), AArch64InstrInfo::hasShiftedReg(), AArch64InstrInfo::hasExtendedReg().
Question: the code beginning at MCOpcodeSwitchStatement above cannot be used as a regular MCSchedPredicate too. If so, how can I avoid writing the same statement twice, since this condition is used both in AArch64InstrInfo.cpp and in AArch64Sched*.td?
Awesome! Please, stand by.
The issue that I'm trying to avoid is that it's not enough for me to add predicates based on MCSchedPredicate for Exynos processors is other processors don't. Then, if an instruction that I model by using a variant schedule is also modeled by another processor, TableGen will emit no solution at all for the instruction. This patch, which I recognize is just an attempt, aims at allowing the proper solution for a processor using such predicates, while indeed resulting in a clumsy solution the scheduling of the same instruction for other processors.
Tue, Nov 20
Mon, Nov 19
Exclude test that does not apply anymore.
Fri, Nov 16
Nov 6 2018
Oct 31 2018
Oct 25 2018
Oct 24 2018
Oct 22 2018
Isn't this change always enabled for -Os? So it should be easy to test it or to enable down to a single function, shouldn't it?
Oct 19 2018
Oct 16 2018
Oct 12 2018
Rather than a feature in AArch.td, I'd prefer a line in AArch64Subtarget::initializeProperties().
Oct 10 2018
I'm getting mixed results on Exynos, with significant improvements and regressions. I'd like to run more tests, but, at the moment, I'd rather that this feature would be gated, either as @jfb or @rengolin suggested.
Oct 9 2018
This is good data. However, I'd like to evaluate this patch a bit further on Exynos, if I may.
Oct 8 2018
Can you please provide some figures on the code size saved and the effect on the performance of this change?