Re: [RFA] sh-sim: free up some room in jump_table

[Joern Rennecke <joern.rennecke@superh.com>]

> 
> Joern Rennecke wrote:
> >>!   printf ("  if (target_dsp && \n");
> >>!   printf ("      (iword & 0xf000) == 0xf000)\n");
> >>!   printf ("    switch (sh_dsp_table[iword & 0xfff]) {\n");
> >>    gensim_caselist (movsxy_tab);
> >>!   printf ("  else switch (jump_table[iword]) {\n");
> > 
> > 
> > You have changed a straight dispatch into an if-then-else with
> > two dispatches, and the integer and fpu arithmetic path goes the long way
> > round the dsp dispatch; this seems to be a surefire way to make the
> > simulator slower.
> > 
> > We don't relly care much about the total size of the simulator, but
> > we care about its working set size, so why don't you generate two
> > separate simulator main loops, to be compiler into separate *.o
> > files, one with the FPU instructions, and the other one with the
> > dsp instructions?
> 
> OK, I need to catch up with you here.  So, your concern is not
> with the time it takes to execute the if condition, but with the
> size and/or distribution of the working set?  I'm not very used
> to programming around such considerations, so I'll look to you
> for guidance.

Actually, I am concerned about both.

> I can see the sense of making two loops, but why would it
> be necessary for them to be in two separate compilation units?
> 
> Would you be willing to specify a performance test that I can
> use, and a test criterion for me to meet?  It might save time,
> given that we seem to have a 24 hour email cycle.

In the past I've used running arith-rand from the c-torture testsuite,
with an iteration count to give a meaningful execution time -
I think it was someting like a minute or a few.