Displaying 20 results from an estimated 24 matches for "176b".
Did you mean:
16b
2017 Oct 15
3
can only ssh unidirectional
...wscale 7], length 0
0x0000: 4500 003c 0000 4000 3c06 a03c 0a68 c412 E..<.. at .<..<.h..
0x0010: 0af0 c515 0016 ddc2 f4a5 e017 8337 ffac .............7..
0x0020: a012 7120 2b22 0000 0204 05b4 0402 080a ..q.+"..........
0x0030: 129f 176b 11e9 9bbf 0103 0307 ...k........
13:22:37.403219 IP (tos 0x0, ttl 64, id 25621, offset 0, flags [DF], proto TCP (6), length 52)
localhost.localdomain.56770 > 10.104.196.18.ssh: Flags [.], cksum 0x9ea6 (incorrect -> 0xca29), seq 1, ack 1, win 229, options [nop,nop,TS val...
2018 Sep 11
2
linear-scan RA
...%0
> %1 = COPY %0
> JMP_1 %bb.3
>
> bb.3:
> NOOP implicit %1
>
>
>
> $ llc -run-pass=liveintervals -debug-only=regalloc test.mir
> ********** INTERVALS **********
> %0 [16r,64B:0)[112B,144r:0) 0 at 16r weight:0.000000e+00
> %1 [80r,112B:1)[144r,176B:0)[176B,192r:2) 0 at 144r 1 at 80r 2 at 176B-phi weight:0.000000e+00
> RegMasks:
> ********** MACHINEINSTRS **********
> # Machine code for function somefunc: NoPHIs
>
> 0B bb.0:
> successors: %bb.2(0x80000000); %bb.2(100.00%)
>
> 16B %0:gr32 = MOV32ri 42
> 32B...
2018 Sep 11
2
linear-scan RA
...> >
> > bb.3:
> > NOOP implicit %1
> >
> >
> >
> > $ llc -run-pass=liveintervals -debug-only=regalloc test.mir
> > ********** INTERVALS **********
> > %0 [16r,64B:0)[112B,144r:0) 0 at 16r weight:0.000000e+00
> > %1 [80r,112B:1)[144r,176B:0)[176B,192r:2) 0 at 144r 1 at 80r 2 at 176B-phi
> weight:0.000000e+00
> > RegMasks:
> > ********** MACHINEINSTRS **********
> > # Machine code for function somefunc: NoPHIs
> >
> > 0B bb.0:
> > successors: %bb.2(0x80000000); %bb.2(100.00%)
> >
> &g...
2018 Sep 11
2
linear-scan RA
The phi instruction is irrelevant; just the way I think about things.
The question is if the allocator believes that t0 and t2 interfere.
Perhaps the coalescing example was too simple.
In the general case, we can't coalesce without a notion of interference.
My worry is that looking at interference by ranges of instruction numbers
leads to inaccuracies when a range is introduced by a copy.
2018 Sep 11
2
linear-scan RA
...>> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > $ llc -run-pass=liveintervals -debug-only=regalloc test.mir
> >> > ********** INTERVALS **********
> >> > %0 [16r,64B:0)[112B,144r:0) 0 at 16r weight:0.000000e+00
> >> > %1 [80r,112B:1)[144r,176B:0)[176B,192r:2) 0 at 144r 1 at 80r 2 at 176B-phi
> weight:0.000000e+00
> >> > RegMasks:
> >> > ********** MACHINEINSTRS **********
> >> > # Machine code for function somefunc: NoPHIs
> >> >
> >> > 0B bb.0:
> >> > successor...
2018 Apr 23
2
pre-RA scheduling/live register analysis optimization (handle move) forcing spill of registers
...%vreg6; FPUaOffsetClass:%vreg7 FPUaROUTMULRegisterClass:%vreg6
128B %vreg8<def> = FADD_A_oo %vreg4, %vreg7, %RFLAGA<imp-def,dead>; FPUaROUTADDRegisterClass:%vreg8 FPUaOffsetClass:%vreg4,%vreg7
144B %FA_ROFF0<def> = COPY %vreg8; FPUaROUTADDRegisterClass:%vreg8
176B MOVSUTO_SU_os_rpc %SU_ROFF0<kill>, %RPC<imp-def,dead>
192B NOP
# End machine code for function addproddivConst.
handleMove 64B -> 104B: %vreg4<def> = COPY %vreg3; FPUaOffsetClass:%vreg4 FPUaROUTMULRegisterClass:%vreg3
%vreg4: [64r,128r:0) 0 at 6...
2018 Sep 11
2
linear-scan RA
...;
>>>>>>
>>>>>> $ llc -run-pass=liveintervals -debug-only=regalloc test.mir
>>>>>> ********** INTERVALS **********
>>>>>> %0 [16r,64B:0)[112B,144r:0) 0 at 16r weight:0.000000e+00
>>>>>> %1 [80r,112B:1)[144r,176B:0)[176B,192r:2) 0 at 144r 1 at 80r 2 at 176B-phi weight:0.000000e+00
>>>>>> RegMasks:
>>>>>> ********** MACHINEINSTRS **********
>>>>>> # Machine code for function somefunc: NoPHIs
>>>>>>
>>>>>> 0B bb.0:
>...
2012 Jun 12
2
[LLVMdev] Assert in live update from MI scheduler.
...OPY %vreg10<kill>; IntRegs:%vreg1,%vreg10
96B %vreg10<def> = LDriw %vreg9<kill>, 0; mem:LD4[%stack.0.in]
IntRegs:%vreg10,%vreg9
112B %vreg9<def> = ADD_ri %vreg10, 8; IntRegs:%vreg9,%vreg10
128B %vreg6<def> = CMPEQri %vreg10, 0; PredRegs:%vreg6 IntRegs:%vreg10
176B JMP_cNot %vreg6<kill>, <BB#1>, %PC<imp-def>; PredRegs:%vreg6
192B JMP <BB#2>
Successors according to CFG: BB#2 BB#1
208B BB#2: derived from LLVM BB %for.end
Predecessors according to CFG: BB#1
224B %vreg7<def> = LDriw %vreg1<kill>, 0;...
2012 Jun 13
0
[LLVMdev] Assert in live update from MI scheduler.
...IntRegs:%vreg1,%vreg10
> 96B %vreg10<def> = LDriw %vreg9<kill>, 0; mem:LD4[%stack.0.in]
> IntRegs:%vreg10,%vreg9
> 112B %vreg9<def> = ADD_ri %vreg10, 8; IntRegs:%vreg9,%vreg10
> 128B %vreg6<def> = CMPEQri %vreg10, 0; PredRegs:%vreg6 IntRegs:%vreg10
> 176B JMP_cNot %vreg6<kill>, <BB#1>, %PC<imp-def>; PredRegs:%vreg6
> 192B JMP <BB#2>
> Successors according to CFG: BB#2 BB#1
>
> 208B BB#2: derived from LLVM BB %for.end
> Predecessors according to CFG: BB#1
> 224B %vreg7<def> =...
2013 Mar 19
0
[LLVMdev] setCC and brcond
...according to CFG: BB#0
112B %vreg3<def> = MOVri 1; GPRegs:%vreg3
128B STWi13 <fi#0>, 0, %vreg3<kill>; mem:ST4[%retval] GPRegs:%vreg3
144B BRrel <BB#3>
Successors according to CFG: BB#3
160B BB#2: derived from LLVM BB %if.else
Predecessors according to CFG: BB#0
176B %vreg2<def> = MOVri 0; GPRegs:%vreg2
192B STWi13 <fi#0>, 0, %vreg2<kill>; mem:ST4[%retval] GPRegs:%vreg2
Successors according to CFG: BB#3
208B BB#3: derived from LLVM BB %return
Predecessors according to CFG: BB#2 BB#1
224B %vreg4<def> = LDWi13 <fi#0>, 0...
2012 Jun 11
0
[LLVMdev] scoreboard hazard det. and instruction groupings
On Jun 11, 2012, at 12:07 PM, Hal Finkel <hfinkel at anl.gov> wrote:
> Looking at VLIWPacketizerList::PacketizeMIs, it seems like the
> instructions are first scheduled (via some external scheme?), and then
> packetized 'in order'. Is that correct?
Anshu?
> In the PowerPC grouping scheme, resources are assigned on a group
> basis (by the instruction dispatching
2020 Mar 31
2
[ARM] Register pressure with -mthumb forces register reload before each call
...4 $q5 $q6 $q7 $r4 $r5 $r6 $r7 $r8 $r9 $r10 $r11 $s16 $s17 $s18 $s19 $s20 $s21 $s22 $s23 $s24 $s25 $s26 $s27 and 35 more...>, implicit-def dead $lr, implicit $sp, implicit $r0, implicit $r1, implicit $r2, implicit-def $sp
160B ADJCALLSTACKUP 0, 0, 14, $noreg, implicit-def dead $sp, implicit $sp
176B ADJCALLSTACKDOWN 0, 0, 14, $noreg, implicit-def dead $sp, implicit $sp
192B $r0 = COPY %0:tgpr
208B $r1 = COPY %1:tgpr
224B $r2 = COPY %2:tgpr
240B tBLXr 14, $noreg, %3:tgpr, <regmask $lr $d8 $d9 $d10 $d11 $d12 $d13 $d14 $d15 $q4 $q5 $q6 $q7 $r4 $r5 $r6 $r7 $r8 $r9 $r10 $r11 $s16 $s17...
2012 Oct 20
2
[LLVMdev] RegisterCoalescing pass crashes with ImplicitDef registers
..., 0, 0, 0, %vreg2, 1, 0, 0, 1, pred:%PRED_SEL_OFF, 0; R600_Reg32:%vreg7 R600_TReg32:%vreg2
144B%vreg8<def> = ADD 0, 0, 1, 0, 0, 0, %vreg7<kill>, 0, 0, 0, %vreg5, 0, 0, 0, 1, pred:%PRED_SEL_OFF, 0; R600_Reg32:%vreg8,%vreg7,%vreg5
160B%vreg10<def> = IMPLICIT_DEF; R600_Reg128:%vreg10
176B%vreg9<def,tied1> = INSERT_SUBREG %vreg10<tied0>, %vreg6<kill>, sel_x; R600_Reg128:%vreg9,%vreg10 R600_Reg32:%vreg6
192B%vreg11<def,tied1> = INSERT_SUBREG %vreg9<tied0>, %vreg8<kill>, sel_y; R600_Reg128:%vreg11,%vreg9 R600_Reg32:%vreg8
208B%vreg13<def> = IMP...
2012 Jun 13
4
[LLVMdev] Assert in live update from MI scheduler.
...t; 96B %vreg10<def> = LDriw %vreg9<kill>, 0; mem:LD4[%stack.0.in]
> > IntRegs:%vreg10,%vreg9
> > 112B %vreg9<def> = ADD_ri %vreg10, 8; IntRegs:%vreg9,%vreg10
> > 128B %vreg6<def> = CMPEQri %vreg10, 0; PredRegs:%vreg6
> IntRegs:%vreg10
> > 176B JMP_cNot %vreg6<kill>, <BB#1>, %PC<imp-def>; PredRegs:%vreg6
> > 192B JMP <BB#2>
> > Successors according to CFG: BB#2 BB#1
> >
> > 208B BB#2: derived from LLVM BB %for.end
> > Predecessors according to CFG: BB#1
> >...
2012 Jun 11
3
[LLVMdev] scoreboard hazard det. and instruction groupings
On Mon, 11 Jun 2012 10:48:18 -0700
Andrew Trick <atrick at apple.com> wrote:
> On Jun 11, 2012, at 9:30 AM, Hal Finkel <hfinkel at anl.gov> wrote:
>
> > I'm considering writing more-detailed itineraries for some PowerPC
> > CPUs that use the 'traditional' instruction grouping scheme. In
> > essence, this means that multiple instructions will stall
2020 Apr 07
2
[ARM] Register pressure with -mthumb forces register reload before each call
If I'm understanding what's going on in this test correctly, what's happening is:
* ARMTargetLowering::LowerCall prefers indirect calls when a function is called at least 3 times in minsize
* In thumb 1 (without -fno-omit-frame-pointer) we have effectively only 3 callee-saved registers (r4-r6)
* The function has three arguments, so those three plus the register we need to hold the
2012 Jun 13
0
[LLVMdev] Assert in live update from MI scheduler.
...> = LDriw %vreg9<kill>, 0; mem:LD4[%stack.0.in]
> > > IntRegs:%vreg10,%vreg9
> > > 112B %vreg9<def> = ADD_ri %vreg10, 8; IntRegs:%vreg9,%vreg10
> > > 128B %vreg6<def> = CMPEQri %vreg10, 0; PredRegs:%vreg6
> > IntRegs:%vreg10
> > > 176B JMP_cNot %vreg6<kill>, <BB#1>, %PC<imp-def>;
> PredRegs:%vreg6
> > > 192B JMP <BB#2>
> > > Successors according to CFG: BB#2 BB#1
> > >
> > > 208B BB#2: derived from LLVM BB %for.end
> > > Predecessors ac...
2020 Apr 15
4
[ARM] Register pressure with -mthumb forces register reload before each call
...4 $q5 $q6 $q7 $r4 $r5 $r6 $r7 $r8 $r9 $r10 $r11 $s16 $s17 $s18 $s19 $s20 $s21 $s22 $s23 $s24 $s25 $s26 $s27 and 35 more...>, implicit-def dead $lr, implicit $sp, implicit $r0, implicit $r1, implicit $r2, implicit-def $sp
160B ADJCALLSTACKUP 0, 0, 14, $noreg, implicit-def dead $sp, implicit $sp
176B ADJCALLSTACKDOWN 0, 0, 14, $noreg, implicit-def dead $sp, implicit $sp
192B $r0 = COPY %0:tgpr
208B $r1 = COPY %2:tgpr
224B $r2 = COPY %1:tgpr
240B tBLXr 14, $noreg, %3:tgpr, <regmask $lr $d8 $d9 $d10 $d11 $d12 $d13 $d14 $d15 $q4 $q5 $q6 $q7 $r4 $r5 $r6 $r7 $r8 $r9 $r10 $r11 $s16 $s17...
2012 Oct 25
2
[LLVMdev] RegisterCoalescing Pass seems to ignore part of CFG.
...ef> = COPY %vreg19<kill>; R600_Reg128:%vreg23,%vreg19
register: %vreg23 +[144r,224r:0)
160B%vreg23:sel_y<def> = COPY %vreg15<kill>; R600_Reg128:%vreg23 R600_TReg32:%vreg15
register: %vreg23 replace range with [144r,160r:1) RESULT: [144r,160r:1)[160r,224r:0) 0 at 160r 1 at 144r
176B%vreg24<def> = COPY %vreg21<kill>; R600_Reg128:%vreg24,%vreg21
register: %vreg24 +[176r,256r:0)
192B%vreg24:sel_y<def> = COPY %vreg2; R600_Reg128:%vreg24 R600_Reg32:%vreg2
register: %vreg24 replace range with [176r,192r:1) RESULT: [176r,192r:1)[192r,256r:0) 0 at 192r 1 at 176r
208...
2012 Oct 25
0
[LLVMdev] RegisterCoalescing Pass seems to ignore part of CFG.
...;; R600_Reg128:%vreg23,%vreg19
> register: %vreg23 +[144r,224r:0)
> 160B%vreg23:sel_y<def> = COPY %vreg15<kill>; R600_Reg128:%vreg23
> R600_TReg32:%vreg15
> register: %vreg23 replace range with [144r,160r:1) RESULT:
> [144r,160r:1)[160r,224r:0) 0 at 160r 1 at 144r
> 176B%vreg24<def> = COPY %vreg21<kill>; R600_Reg128:%vreg24,%vreg21
> register: %vreg24 +[176r,256r:0)
> 192B%vreg24:sel_y<def> = COPY %vreg2; R600_Reg128:%vreg24
> R600_Reg32:%vreg2
> register: %vreg24 replace range with [176r,192r:1) RESULT:
> [176r,192r:1)[192r,256r:...