This is the mail archive of the cgen@sources.redhat.com mailing list for the CGEN project.


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
Other format: [Raw text]

exposed pipeline patch (long!)


Handling exposed pipelines can get really messy
when one takes bypass networks into account.

Question: For the ports in question, are the delays ISA related
or implementation related?

If they're ISA related then specifying the delays in rtl is appropriate.

If they're implementation related (e.g. related to the depth of
the pipeline), then I think rtl isn't the way to go.
[I suppose an ISA could specify the depth of the pipeline
but that wouldn't be the norm.]
One way to go would be to specify the hazards independently of the rtl.


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]