Appeal No. 96-1588
Application 08/036,947
compared (Fig. 9d). Since the chain ending in instr-2 includes
two non-squeezed instructions (both Add) and the chain ending in
instr-7 includes only one (Add), instr-2 (Add) is selected over
instr-7 (Divide). However, because instr-2 (Add) must be
executed before instr-3 (Multiply), instr-2 cannot be assigned to
SLOT 1 together with instr-3; it must be assigned to the next
time slot, SLOT 2. Thus, in addition to distinguishing between
squeezed and non-squeezed instructions, appellant's scheduling
method takes into account the availability of resources and the
dependency of an instruction on another unexecuted instruction,
factors which are identified as "resource constraints" and
"precedence constraints" in paragraph d of the claim. The
analysis proceeds in the foregoing manner (see Figs. 9e to 9h)
until all of the instructions have been assigned, with the
resulting schedule being shown in Figure 10a.
Claim 1 reads as follows:
1. In a computer system comprising a compiler compiling a
plurality of programs targeted for a multi-issue architecture
computer, a method implemented by a scheduler of said compiler
for determining an execution schedule for executing a basic block
of one of said programs on said targeted computer, said method
comprising the steps of:
a) setting a schedule size for said execution schedule to be
determined in an architectural [sic; architecturally] dependent
manner;
4
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007