[llvm-commits] Speeding up instruction selection

[Roman Levenstein]

Hi Evan,

2008/4/1, Evan Cheng <evan.cheng at apple.com>:
> Please hold off checking it in for a bit. llvm tot is having some
>  problems and I'd like to get to the bottom of it first.

OK.

>  Also, the tie breaker is less than ideal. I think we need a tie-
>  breaker that is "the SUnit that's added to the queue is preferred".
>  That means it prefers nodes which are closer to the end of block. What
>  do you think?

Do you actually mean "the SUnit that's added to the queue LAST (or
FIRST) is preferred"? I'll think about it.

-Roman


>  On Apr 1, 2008, at 6:23 AM, Roman Levenstein wrote:
>
>  > Hi Dan,
>  >
>  > 2008/4/1, Dan Gohman <gohman at apple.com>:
>  >>
>  >> On Mar 26, 2008, at 12:19 PM, Roman Levenstein wrote:
>  >>>
>  >>
>  >>> Evan played with it, but there was a problem with 176.gcc (which is
>  >>> probably unrelated) and somehow the review is stuck at the moment.
>  >>
>  >>
>  >> Hi Roman,
>  >>
>  >> I believe we've finally resolved the 176.gcc problem! One of Evan's
>  >> coalescer fixes, 48752, allows 176.gcc to pass, even with your queue
>  >> ordering patch applied.
>  >>
>  >> Thanks for your patience while we investigated this.
>  >
>  > These are good news. How do we proceed with that patch?
>  >
>  > -Roman
>
> > _______________________________________________
>  > llvm-commits mailing list
>  > llvm-commits at cs.uiuc.edu
>  > http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/llvm-commits
>
>  _______________________________________________
>  llvm-commits mailing list
>  llvm-commits at cs.uiuc.edu
>  http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/llvm-commits
>