[LLVMdev] Experimental Evaluation of the Schedulers in LLVM 3.3

[Andrew Trick]

On Aug 14, 2014, at 7:51 PM, Richard Bagley <rickbagley at gmail.com> wrote:

> I am seeking advice.
> 
>  
> In your estimation, how difficult would it be to retrofit LLVM
> 
> 3.2 with this body of improvements to instruction scheduling (and
> 
> optionally, the loop vectorization as well).
> 
By now you probably know the answer to this better than I do. But for the record:
MI scheduling infrastructure was largely in place by the 3.2 release. Since then there have been bug fixes, new heuristics, and more target hooks. Those improvements would probably be possible to back port if you’re really into that kind of thing.

I’m going to guess that loop vectorization would be harder to back port because much more work has been done in the past 3 releases. However, it is mostly a self-contained pass apart from the cost model, so might be possible, just a lot harder.

-Andy

>  
> Would you have any suggestions for how best this might be
> 
> achieved, i.e.  the scope of the code required? Has anyone
> 
> attempted this kind of retrofit?
> 
>  
> Thanks,
> 
> Rick
> 
> _______________________________________________
> LLVM Developers mailing list
> LLVMdev at cs.uiuc.edu         http://llvm.cs.uiuc.edu
> http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/llvmdev

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/attachments/20140904/5e4b0ae2/attachment.html>