R600 doesn't need to do any scheduling on the SelectionDAG now that it
has a very good MachineScheduler. Also, using the VLIW SelectionDAG
scheduler was having a major impact on compile times. For example with
the phatk kernel here are the LLVM IR to machine code compile times:
With Sched::VLIW
Total Compile Time: 1.4890 Seconds (User + System)
SelectionDAG Instruction Scheduling: 1.1670 Seconds (User + System)
With Sched::Source
Total Compile Time: 0.3330 Seconds (User + System)
SelectionDAG Instruction Scheduling: 0.0070 Seconds (User + System)
The code ouput was identical with both schedulers. This may not be true
for all programs, but it gives me confidence that there won't be much
reduction, if any, in code quality by using Sched::Source.
git-svn-id: https://llvm.org/svn/llvm-project/llvm/trunk@188215 91177308-0d34-0410-b5e6-96231b3b80d8
+==============================================================================+
| How to organize the lit tests |
+==============================================================================+
- If you write a test for matching a single DAG opcode or intrinsic, it should
go in a file called {opcode_name,intrinsic_name}.ll (e.g. fadd.ll)
- If you write a test that matches several DAG opcodes and checks for a single
ISA instruction, then that test should go in a file called {ISA_name}.ll (e.g.
bfi_int.ll
- For all other tests, use your best judgement for organizing tests and naming
the files.
+==============================================================================+
| Naming conventions |
+==============================================================================+
- Use dash '-' and not underscore '_' to separate words in file names, unless
the file is named after a DAG opcode or ISA instruction that has an
underscore '_' in its name.
Tom Stellard
f15dfe4eb4