Displaying 5 results from an estimated 5 matches for "17160448".
Did you mean:
17160443
2005 Mar 11
0
[LLVMdev] FP Intrinsics
...1D6240h],0
1716041D mov dword ptr ds:[161D6244h],0
17160427 mov dword ptr ds:[161D6248h],0
17160431 mov dword ptr ds:[161D624Ch],0
1716043B mov eax,76E4560h
17160440 mov dword ptr [esp],eax
17160443 call HueVMReadCommands_LLVMReadVoxel (19BB229h)
17160448 fsub dword ptr ds:[161D6280h]
1716044E fabs
17160450 fst qword ptr [esp+14h]
17160454 ftst
17160456 fstp st(0)
17160458 fnstsw ax
1716045A sahf
1716045B fldz
1716045D fchs
1716045F fld qword ptr [esp+14h]
17160463 fucomip st,st(1)
17160465 fstp...
2005 Mar 11
5
[LLVMdev] FP Intrinsics
Hello,
I am trying to make the FP intrinsics (abs, sin, cos, sqrt) I've added
work with the X86ISelPattern, but I'm having some difficulties
understanding what needs to be done. I assume I have to add new
nodetypes for the FP instructions to SelectionDAGNodes.h, and make nodes
for these in SelectionDAGLowering::visitCall when I find the intrinsic...
The part I don't quite
2005 Mar 17
1
[LLVMdev] Floating point compare instruction selection
...e
> benchmarking and find that one is noticably faster than the other, we
> should switch them both to use the same code sequence.
It's generating _both_ the SAHF and the fucomi -- look at the code ISelPattern generates:
17160443 call HueVMReadCommands_LLVMReadVoxel (19BB229h)
17160448 fsub dword ptr ds:[161D6280h]
1716044E fabs
17160450 fst qword ptr [esp+14h]
17160454 ftst
17160456 fstp st(0)
17160458 fnstsw ax
1716045A sahf
1716045B fldz
1716045D fchs
1716045F fld qword ptr [esp+14h]
17160463 fucomip st,st(1)
17160465 fstp...
2005 Mar 16
0
[LLVMdev] Floating point compare instruction selection
On Wed, 16 Mar 2005, Morten Ofstad wrote:
> Hello,
>
> I didn't get any reply to my previous mail about adding floating point
> intrinsics to the X86 pattern instruction selector... And I could really need
> some help.
Sorry about that, it slipped through the cracks. :(
> Anyway, I think my confusion was caused partly by an already
> existing bug in the instruction
2005 Mar 16
2
[LLVMdev] Floating point compare instruction selection
Hello,
I didn't get any reply to my previous mail about adding floating point intrinsics to the X86 pattern instruction
selector... And I could really need some help. Anyway, I think my confusion was caused partly by an already existing bug
in the instruction selection for floating point compares.
The case which emits code for the special case of comparing against constant 0.0 does not