|200 way issue? firstname.lastname@example.org (1993-09-29)|
|Re: 200 way issue? email@example.com (1993-09-30)|
|Re: 200 way issue? firstname.lastname@example.org (1993-09-30)|
|Re: 200 way issue? grover@brahmand.Eng.Sun.COM (1993-09-30)|
|Re: 200 way issue? email@example.com (1993-09-30)|
|Re: 200 way issue? firstname.lastname@example.org (1993-10-01)|
|Re: 200 way issue? email@example.com (1993-10-01)|
|Re: 200 way issue? firstname.lastname@example.org (Dave Gillespie) (1993-10-04)|
|From:||email@example.com (Preston Briggs)|
|Organization:||Rice University, Houston|
|Date:||Fri, 1 Oct 1993 15:25:52 GMT|
firstname.lastname@example.org (David Moore) writes:
>How many way issue can one actually use on real code?
>Suppose, for example, we took the spec benchmarks and optimized for an
>infinite issue machine. Now suppose we built a histogram of actual number
>of instructions issued per machine cycle. Has anyone published a paper on
>what this histogram would look like?
Papers like this tend to appear in ASPLOS.
title="Available Instruction-Level Parallelism for Superscalar and
author="Norman P. Jouppi and David W. Wall",
title="Limits of Instruction-Level Parallelism",
author="David W. Wall",
address="Santa Clara, California",
The hard parts about such papers (in general, no criticism of Jouppi
and Wall intended) are the assumptions about the machines and
optimization techniques. In any case, these two papers are certainly
a good starting point.
Return to the
Search the comp.compilers archives again.