Related articles |
---|
Any further work on superoptimizer? mark@hubcap.clemson.edu (1992-01-22) |
Re: Any further work on superoptimizer? chased@rbbb.Eng.Sun.COM (1992-01-23) |
Re: Any further work on superoptimizer? megatest!djones@decwrl.dec.com (1992-01-29) |
Re: Any further work on superoptimizer? hrubin@pop.stat.purdue.edu (1992-02-02) |
Re: Any further work on superoptimizer? rmf@chopin.cs.columbia.edu (1992-02-03) |
Re: Any further work on superoptimizer? spot@CS.CMU.EDU (1992-02-03) |
Re: Any further work on superoptimizer? mfx@cs.tu-berlin.de (1992-02-04) |
[2 later articles] |
Newsgroups: | comp.compilers |
From: | mark@hubcap.clemson.edu (Mark Smotherman) |
Keywords: | optimize |
Organization: | Compilers Central |
Date: | Wed, 22 Jan 92 14:36:13 -0500 |
Henry Massalin published a paper on a superoptimizer in ASPLOS II, 1987
[1]. One important aspect of this work was the generation of *branchless*
run-time library routines for simple functions (e.g., absolute value, max)
that could be in-line substituted. Thus the overhead of procedure call
and the problem of branch stalls / delay slot scheduling were avoided.
Has there been other work in this vein for current processors? What is
the state of practice? Are current SPARC, MIPS, etc. compilers using this
technique for frequently-used library functions?
[1] H. Massalin, "Superoptimizer: A look at the smallest program,"
Proc. 2nd Intl. Conf. on Arch. Support for Prog. Langs. and
Op. Sys., Palo Alto, October 1987, pp. 122-126.
--
Mark Smotherman, CS Dept., Clemson University, Clemson, SC 29634-1906
(803) 656-5878, mark@cs.clemson.edu or mark@hubcap.clemson.edu
--
Return to the
comp.compilers page.
Search the
comp.compilers archives again.