Re: Software Pipelining

Pertti Kellomaki <pertti.kellomaki@tut.fi>
Wed, 17 Sep 2008 15:15:26 +0300

          From comp.compilers
Related articles
[4 earlier articles]
Re: Software Pipelining mr.neeraj@gmail.com (Neeraj Goel) (2008-09-02)
Re: Software Pipelining sidtouati@inria.fr (Touati Sid) (2008-09-08)
Re: Software Pipelining kamalpr@hp.com (kamal) (2008-09-10)
Re: Software Pipelining johnhull2008@gmail.com (johnhull2008) (2008-09-11)
Re: Software Pipelining plfriko@yahoo.de (Tim Frink) (2008-09-16)
Re: Software Pipelining plfriko@yahoo.de (Tim Frink) (2008-09-16)
Re: Software Pipelining pertti.kellomaki@tut.fi (Pertti Kellomaki) (2008-09-17)
Re: Software Pipelining cdg@nullstone.com (Christopher Glaeser) (2008-09-21)
Re: Software Pipelining armelasselin@hotmail.com (Armel) (2008-09-24)
Software pipelining napi@rangkom.MY (1991-07-04)
Re: Software pipelining pardo@gar.cs.washington.edu (1991-07-19)
| List of all articles for this month |
From: Pertti Kellomaki <pertti.kellomaki@tut.fi>
Newsgroups: comp.compilers
Date: Wed, 17 Sep 2008 15:15:26 +0300
Organization: Compilers Central
References: 08-08-072 08-08-086 08-08-092 08-09-056 08-09-078
Keywords: optimize
Posted-Date: 17 Sep 2008 17:54:12 EDT

Tim Frink wrote:
>>> And if profiling might be exploited here.
>> I didn't get you there i.e. profiling doesn't seem related to
>> pipelining as described above.
>
> This was just a question if it would make sense to somehow
> combine software pipelining with the most frequently executed
> path (determined by profiling). I can't imagine any useful
> combination of these two techniques, but maybe there are some?


Software pipelining does not provide much performance
increase for loops with low trip counts, but it increases
code size. So using it anywhere else but in the frequently
executed paths would be rather ill adviced. Profiling is a
good way to find those paths.
--
Pertti


Post a followup to this message

Return to the comp.compilers page.
Search the comp.compilers archives again.