Hi Duncan, We are targetting a reasonably functional PIC16 backend for llvm 2.5. The only problem in our way is a local patch in ExpandIntegerOperand, which couldn't make its way to trunk so far. The discussion is contained in the following link: http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/pipermail/llvm-commits/Week-of-Mon-20081103/069593.html I now have time to take it up again and do whatever rework is required. I saw that you have made some changes in the legalizer recently; let me know if the same discussion in the above thread still holds good and whether we can start working on it as described therein. Thanks - Sanjiv -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/attachments/20090108/9b59f974/attachment.html>
Hi Sanjiv,> We are targetting a reasonably functional PIC16 backend for llvm 2.5. > The only problem in our way is a local patch in ExpandIntegerOperand, which couldn't make its way to trunk so far. The discussion is contained in the following link: > > http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/pipermail/llvm-commits/Week-of-Mon-20081103/069593.html > > I now have time to take it up again and do whatever rework is required. I saw that you have made some changes in the legalizer recently; let me know if the same discussion in the above thread still holds good and whether we can start working on it as described therein.I don't remember what the discussion was about any more. The link doesn't contain much. Anyway, as you may have noticed I changed the definition of the target hook "ReplaceNodeResults". Probably the same method, or one with a similar definition, should be used for custom lowering in the case of an illegal operand. Would this solve your problem? Ciao, Duncan.
Well, the first email is here. http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/pipermail/llvm-commits/Week-of-Mon-20081013/068667.html -----Original Message----- From: Duncan Sands [mailto:baldrick at free.fr] Sent: Thu 1/8/2009 8:41 PM To: Sanjiv Kumar Gupta - I00171 Cc: llvmdev at cs.uiuc.edu Subject: Re: PIC16 backend for llvm 2.5 Hi Sanjiv,> We are targetting a reasonably functional PIC16 backend for llvm 2.5. > The only problem in our way is a local patch in ExpandIntegerOperand, which couldn't make its way to trunk so far. The discussion is contained in the following link: > > http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/pipermail/llvm-commits/Week-of-Mon-20081103/069593.html > > I now have time to take it up again and do whatever rework is required. I saw that you have made some changes in the legalizer recently; let me know if the same discussion in the above thread still holds good and whether we can start working on it as described therein.I don't remember what the discussion was about any more. The link doesn't contain much. Anyway, as you may have noticed I changed the definition of the target hook "ReplaceNodeResults". Probably the same method, or one with a similar definition, should be used for custom lowering in the case of an illegal operand. Would this solve your problem? Ciao, Duncan. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/attachments/20090108/7d64a581/attachment.html>