[llvm-dev] [VLIW Scheduler] Itineraries vs. per operand scheduling

[陳韋任 via llvm-dev]

>
> I also found this thread from almost 2 years ago:
>
> http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/2016-April/098763.html
>
>
>
> At that time it seemed the itineraries are a better choice, but is it
> still the case?
>
> Also, in this thread Phil says:
>
> “Some of the constraints that can be found in in-order micro architectures
> cannot be expressed in the per-operand scheduling model”
>
> Does anybody have an example of such constraints that will be harder to
> model with per operand scheduling?
>

​From the thread you provided, it says

ARM might be a good start for generic superscalar. Hexagon for VLIW style
scheduling.​


​Anyway, I also interest in knowing their difference. :-)

Regards,
chenwj​


-- 
Wei-Ren Chen (陳韋任)
Homepage: https://people.cs.nctu.edu.tw/~chenwj
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/attachments/20180205/6a5dbdd0/attachment.html>