search for: rs1

def STOREbos { // InstructionEncoding Instruction RPPInst RPPInstMMEMrr &nbsp; field bits<32&gt; Inst = { 0, 0, 0, 1, rs1{2}, rs1{1}, rs1{0}, index{0}, 0, 0, 0, 1, 0, rbase{3}, rbase{2}, rbase{1}, rbase{0}, rbase{4}, roffset{4}, roffset{3}, roffset{2}, roffset{1}, roffset{0}, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0 }; &nbsp; field bits<32&gt; SoftFail = { 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0,...

...t;; Date:&nbsp;Fri, Nov 22, 2019 09:51 PM To:&nbsp;"Celine"<595602881 at qq.com&gt;;"llvm-dev"<llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org&gt;; Subject:&nbsp;RE: Re:RE: Re:RE: Re:RE: [llvm-dev] Tablegen PAT limitation? Thanks. Looking at the InOperandList, the rs1, rbase, etc. have register class prefixes, e.g. MGPR:$rs1.&nbsp; In the pattern they don’t have them.&nbsp; The error you saw (“rs1 must be an identifier”) was caused by tablegen being unable to match the rs1 in the pattern with any of the instruction operands. Could you change the patte...

Hi Krzysztof, Today I try it on llvm9.0.0 version. &nbsp; def bos : RPPInstMMEMrr<OPC_STORE, &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; (outs), (ins MGPR:$rs1, SGPR32:$rbase, MGPR:$roffset, uimm2:$rshift), &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; !strconcat(opcodestr, ""), "$rs1, [$rbase + ( $roffset << $rshift )]", &nbsp; //&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp;...

...similarly but performs signed multiply and accumulate. The MAC instructions execute in one clock but have two clocks latency, meaning that one pipeline stall cycle will be inserted if the following instruction uses the destination register of the MAC as a source operand. Assembler syntax: smac rs1, reg_imm, rd Operation: prod[31:0] = rs1[15:0] * reg_imm[15:0] result[39:0] = (Y[7:0] & %asr18[31:0]) + prod[31:0] (Y[7:0] & %asr18[31:0]) = result[39:0] rd = result[31:0] %asr18 can be read and written using the rdasr and wrasr instructions. === I have the following in S...

...ls/TableGen/TableGen.cpp:253:0 #27 0x00007f163fa21830 __libc_start_main /build/glibc-LK5gWL/glibc-2.23/csu/../csu/libc-start.c:325:0 #28 0x0000000000407bd9 _start (../../../bin/llvm-tblgen+0x407bd9) =========================================================== PATTERN: (st v1i16:{ *:[v1i16] }:$rs1, (add:{ *:[v1i32] } (shl:{ *:[v1i32] } (sext:{ *:[v1i32] } v1i16:{ *:[v1i16] }:$roffset), (build_vector:{ *:[v1i32] } (imm:{ *:[i32] })<<P:Predicate_uimm2&gt;&gt;:$rshift)), (bitconvert:{ *:[v1i32] } i32:{ *:[i32] }:$rbase)))<<P:Predicate_unindexedstore&gt;&gt;<<P:...

...iedma at codeaurora.org> wrote: > > On 12/13/2018 6:25 AM, Alex Bradbury wrote: > > There's also likely to be cases where you want to calculate the demanded bits > > in order to determine if e.g. a W-suffixed instruction can be selected for > > `(somoeop (zexti32 GPR:$rs1), (zexti32 GPR:$rs2))`. This is easy to match if > > the SelectionDAG contains an explicit `sext_inreg` of the result. But if not, > > you'd need to check whether the upper 32 bits are actually demanded or not. > > Could you describe more specifically where this matters? I wo...

...t it from some higher level construct? I'd expect the former would be entirely sufficient, in which case this should be sufficient: let Predicates = [HasLeon3, HasLeon4], Defs = [Y, ASR18], Uses = [Y, ASR18] in def SMACrr : F3_1<3, 0b111110, (outs IntRegs:$rd), (ins IntRegs:$rs1, IntRegs:$rs2), "smac $rs1, $rs2, $rd", []>; If you want the latter, I'm not sure how you'd go about being able to pattern-match it, because of the unusual 40 bit accumulate input and output, and the unusual for sparc 16-bit inputs. Hopefully...

Hi Guys, Here is the setup. LVS NAT cluster with director (dir), backup director (bdir), and two realservers (rs1 and rs2) running apache webserver. SSH DSA key-based authentication set up between rs1 and rs2 in order to facilitate automated (via cron) mirorring of htdocs directories. All works fine untill I decide to host DNS on the same cluster. As soon as I start BIND on rs1, ssh no longer works to this mac...

...parallelized) checks that depends on random number generation, e.g., the simulated data in the check suite are no longer the same as before parallelization was added. This seems to be due to 'parallel' changing '.Random.seed' when loading its name space: > set.seed(1) > rs1 <- .Random.seed > rnorm(1) [1] -0.6264538 > set.seed(1) > rs2 <- .Random.seed > identical(rs1, rs2) [1] TRUE > loadNamespace("parallel") <environment: namespace:parallel> > rs3 <- .Random.seed > identical(rs1, rs3) [1] FALSE > rnorm(1) [1] -0...

...quot;' can never be matched!"); // FIXME: Should reject these. The ARM backend hits this with $lane in a // bunch of instructions. It is unclear what the right answer is. … Is there a way to fix this limitation? I would like to express: InstAlias<(opcode $rd, $rd, $rs1), (newopcode $rd, $rs1)> Thank you, Ana. -- Ana Pazos Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. is a member of Code Aurora Forum, a Linux Foundation Collaborative Project.

...or this. It is essential to know the original type of the shift amount. The fact it was i32 means that it's safe to select SLLW in this case (as a shift amount > 31 would be undefined behaviour). It's tempting to write a pattern like the following: def : Pat<(sext_inreg (shl GPR:$rs1, GPR:$rs2), i32), (SLLW GPR:$rs1, GPR:$rs2)>; But as Eli Friedman kindly pointed out, the `sext_inreg` node can be generated in cases other than i32 to i64 widening. e.g. define i64 @tricky_shl(i64 %a, i64 %b) { %1 = shl i64 %a, %b %2 = shl i64 %1, 32 %3 = a...

Hi, Here's llvm-tblgen -print-records message: def LOADbos { // Instruction ABCInst ABCInstMMEMrr field bits<32> Inst = { 0, 0, 0, 0, rs1{2}, rs1{1}, rs1{0}, index{0}, 0, 0, 0, 1, 0, rbase{3}, rbase{2}, rbase{1}, rbase{0}, rbase{4}, roffset{4}, roffset{3}, roffset{2}, roffset{1}, roffset{0}, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0 }; field bits<32> SoftFail = { 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0...

Hi Daniel, I defined checkEarlyTargetMatchPredicate() to explicitly check for the tied operands, and it worked. I could define an alias like: InstAlias<"oldOP $rd, $rd, $rs1", (NEWOP $rd, $rs1)> However, I had to additionally change AsmMatcherEmitter 'Hack' variable setting to allow the repeated operand $rd in the AsmString. Do you or anyone else know the history with this 'Hack' flag? Thanks, Ana. diff --git a/utils/TableGen/AsmMatcherEmi...

...hed!"); > // FIXME: Should reject these. The ARM backend hits this with $lane in a > // bunch of instructions. It is unclear what the right answer is. > … > > Is there a way to fix this limitation? > > I would like to express: InstAlias<(opcode $rd, $rd, $rs1), (newopcode $rd, $rs1)> > > Thank you, > Ana. > > > -- > Ana Pazos > Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. > Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. is a member of Code Aurora Forum, > a Linux Foundation Collaborative Project. > _________________________________________...

Hi, I''ve tried several different approaches to debootstrap a working rootfs for with a Cortex A15 model ( FastModels ) and Xen but still face some issues. Some information on my setup. For a Dom0 kernel I''m using the latest version from git://github.com/torvalds/linux.git, I attached my config as it might be of some use for others. I''m using the latest Xen unstable

I'm trying to write a tablegen pattern to that matches a sequence of SDNodes and emits again an SDNode and another instruction. The pattern I've written looks like the folowing: def : Pat<(foo (bar GPR:$rs1), simm12:$imm1), (bar (BAZ GPR:$rs1, simm12:$imm1))>; foo and bar are SDNodes, BAZ is an instruction. In particular, bar is defined as follows: def bar : SDNode<"ISD::BAR", SDTIntUnaryOp>; The basic idea of this pattern is to propagate bar over certain instructions u...

...ot otherwise. Matt, wdyt? > I stumbled upon this because this reordering actually gives problems for instruction selection in the NVPTX backend. > Without reordering, the above IR gets lowered to: > > ld.param.u64 %rd1, [test_param_0]; > cvta.to.global.u64 %rd2, %rd1; > mov.u16 %rs1, 0; > st.global.u16 [%rd2+32], %rs1; > ret; > > But with the reordering, the backend instead emits this: > > ld.param.u64 %rd1, [test_param_0]; > add.s64 %rd2, %rd1, 32; > cvta.to.global.u64 %rd3, %rd2; > mov.u16 %rs1, 0; > st.global.u16 [%rd3], %rs1; > ret; > &g...

in llvm-3.6.2.src 1. when I put this around one of my instruction definitions in my target "InstrInfo.td" file, let TwoOperandAliasConstraint = "$dst = $rs1" in { } I do not see any TIED_TO in the generated GenInstrInfo.inc file for the OperandInfo used by the instruction, the question is what am I doing wrong ? 2. I've noticed that TwoOperandAliasConstraint does not appear anywhere in source/lib/Target/X86/* yet TIED_TO occurs in...

...14. Now I'm trying to add an Openwrt device and it includes 1.0.33 only. This will replace the Tomato Shibby device with 1.1pre14. I just downgraded one of my other devices to 1.0 (1.0.34) to see if this was going to work, and it doesn't connect. The master is logging: Jun 27 20:27:28 rs1 tincd[3169]: Peer dbtest3 (2400:8901::f03c:91ff:fe2c:2d7e port 48389) tries to roll back protocol version to 17.0 Jun 27 20:27:28 rs1 tincd[3169]: Error while processing ID from dbtest3 (2400:8901::f03c:91ff:fe2c:2d7e port 48389) Should this connect? Do I need to downgrade everything to 1.0, o...

Hi, I'm not sure. But in your lowered DAG the chain nodes are the first operands for you custom nodes, however for the other nodes the chain is the last operand. I seem to remember that during targetlowering the chain is the first operand and then it seems to switch over after ISelDAG, this confused me and may have something to do with the issue that you are seeing. I really don't