search for: addrr

...d S0, S1, S2, S3, S4, S5, S6, S7, S8, S9, S10, S11, S12, S13, S14, S15 )>; def SFGPR32 : RegisterClass<"ABC", [f32], 16, (add S0, S1, S2, S3, S4, S5, S6, S7, S8, S9, S10, S11, S12, S13, S14, S15 )>; ===== Instruction selection ends: ... t8: i32 = ADDrr t37, t32 ... Instruction Selection correct : i32 = ADDrr i32, i32 *** MachineFunction at end of ISel *** # Machine code for function _Z11scalar_loopPsS_ss: IsSSA, TracksLiveness ... %31:sfgpr32 = ADDrr killed %32:sgpr32, %27:sgpr32 ... Here should not select f32 sfgpr32 register, debugger point...

Hi, I'm looking for some suggestions on a problem related to the Hexagon backend. Hexagon architecture allows instructions in various formats. For example, we have 3 variations of the add instruction as defined below: ADDrr : r1 = add(r2, r3) --> add 2 32-bit registers ADDrr_p : if(p0) r1 = add(r2, r3) --> predicated version of ADDrr instruction, executed when p0 is true ADDrr_np : if(!p0) r1 = add(r2, r3) --> predicated version of ADDrr instruction, executed when p0 is false Currently, we rely on switch ta...

...#39;d like to understand how register allocation works in the case where an instruction is folded into another one. Where in the code would be a good place to start looking at? After ISEL, one of the instructions has another instruction folded into it, which looks like this t1: i32,i1,i1,i1,i1 = ADDRR TargetFrameIndex:i32<0>, MOVRI:i32,i1,i1 But during the 'Assembly Printer' pass, when emitting the assembly for ADDRR, the assertion at the beginning of getRegisterName() in XXXGenAsmWriter.inc fails because RegNo is 0. I'd like to know how that happened. Thanks. --------------...

...ic relation between itself > and 'ThisInstr'. > > For example: > class Relations { > Instruction ThisInstr; > Instruction BaseForm; > Instruction TruePred; > Instruction FalsePred; > } > > def Rel_ADDrr : Relations<ADDrr, ADDrr, ADDrr_p, ADDrr_np>; > def Rel_ADDrr_p: Relations<ADDrr_p, ADDrr, , >; > def Rel_ADDrr_np : Relations<ADDrr_np,ADDrr, , >; The problem is, this isn't really any better than having a large switch statement. You just moved the table into the .td f...

...c relation between itself and > 'ThisInstr'. > > For example: > class Relations { > Instruction ThisInstr; > Instruction BaseForm; > Instruction TruePred; > Instruction FalsePred; > } > > def Rel_ADDrr : Relations<ADDrr, ADDrr, ADDrr_p, ADDrr_np>; def > Rel_ADDrr_p: Relations<ADDrr_p, ADDrr, , >; def Rel_ADDrr_np : > Relations<ADDrr_np,ADDrr, , >; The problem is, this isn't really any better than having a large switch statement. You just moved the table into the .td...

...ruction op mnemonic with multiple operand forms. For example: Add R1, R2 & Add @R1, R2. I found that there is similar case in x86 instruction set, such like ADD reg, reg & ADD mem, reg. However, the solution of x86 is adding suffix of instruction and translating instruction op mnemonic into ADDrr & ADDmr. I don't want to translate single instruction op mnemonic with different operand forms into multiple op mnemonics. I am wondering to know whether is another solution of this problem or not?? Which target should I look for it?? thanks a lot yi-hong -------------- next part --------...

...n the assertion is thrown is always a LDrli (load from an address given by a register + 32-bit immediate, to a register), which is defined as: def LDrli : Pseudo<(outs CPURegs:$dst), (ins MEMrli:$addr), "ld $dst,$addr", [(set CPURegs:$dst, (load ADDRrli:$addr))]>; Where ADDRrli and MEMrli are: def ADDRrli : ComplexPattern<i32, 2, "SelectADDRrli", [frameindex], []>; // Register + long immediate. def MEMrli : Operand<i32> { let PrintMethod = "printMemOperand"; let MIOperandInfo = (ops CPURegs, limm32); }...

On Aug 16, 2012, at 1:39 PM, Jyotsna Verma <jverma at codeaurora.org> wrote: > Hi Everyone, > > After some more thoughts to the Jacob's suggestion of using multiclasses for > Opcode mapping, this is what I have come up with. Please take a look at the > design below and let me know if you have any suggestions/questions. Hi Jyotsna, You are on to something here, but you

I'm writing a back-end for a target in which all dyadic instructions support one register and one memory operand but only some instructions support two register operations. For example ADDrm and ADDrr are supported, ANDrm is supported but ANDrr isn't. I've written descriptions for ADDrm, ADDrr and ANDrm in my InstrInfo.td file but instruction selection fails when presented with an AND that has two register operands, e.g. e = (a + b) & (c + d); I guess I need to force one of the op...

...eg4<def> = COPY %vreg9:gsub_0; GPR:%vreg4 GPRPair:%vreg9 %vreg5<def> = COPY %vreg9:gsub_1; GPR:%vreg5 GPRPair:%vreg9 %vreg6<def> = LDRi12 %vreg3, 120, pred:14, pred:%noreg; mem:LD4[%arrayidx89](tbaa=!"int") GPR:%vreg6,%vreg3 %vreg7<def> = ADDrr %vreg4<kill>, %vreg5<kill>, pred:14, pred:%noreg, opt:%noreg; GPR:%vreg7,%vreg4,%vreg5 %vreg8<def> = ADDrr %vreg7<kill>, %vreg6<kill>, pred:14, pred:%noreg, opt:%noreg; GPR:%vreg8,%vreg7,%vreg6 %R0<def> = COPY %vreg8; GPR:%vreg8 BX_RET...

...ionships between instructions. I define multiple IFormat objects one per relationship which finally translates into a unique column into the mapping table. def Format_rr : IFormat<1>; def Format_ri : IFormat<2>; def Format_predt : IFormat<3>; def Format_predf : IFormat<4>; Addrr : { Addrr, Addri, Addrr_pt, Addrr_pf, .. , ..} Addri : { Addrr, Addri, Addri_pt, Addri_pf,.. > Do something like this: > > def getPredicatedOpcode : InstrMapping { > // Only include instructions form the PredRel class. > let FilterClass = "PredRel"; > > // In...

...ruction op mnemonic with multiple operand forms. For example: Add R1, R2 & Add @R1, R2. I found that there is similar case in x86 instruction set, such like ADD reg, reg & ADD mem, reg. However, the solution of x86 is adding suffix of instruction and translating instruction op mnemonic into ADDrr & ADDmr. I don't want to translate single instruction op mnemonic with different operand forms into multiple op mnemonics. I am wondering to know whether is another solution of this problem or not?? Which target should I look for it?? thanks a lot yi-hong -------------- next part --------...

...with multiple operand forms. > For example: Add R1, R2 & Add @R1, R2. I found that there is similar case in > x86 instruction set, such like ADD reg, reg & ADD mem, reg. However, the > solution of x86 is adding suffix of instruction and translating instruction > op mnemonic into ADDrr & ADDmr. I don't want to translate single instruction > op mnemonic with different operand forms into multiple op mnemonics. I am > wondering to know whether is another solution of this problem or not?? Which > target should I look for it?? > > > > thanks a lot > &gt...

...%reg1028<def> = MOVr %reg1040<kill>, pred:14, pred:%reg0, opt:%reg0 %reg1030<def> = MOVr %reg1027<kill>, pred:14, pred:%reg0, opt:%reg0 %reg1037<def>, %reg1030<def> = LDR_POST %reg1030, %reg0, 4, pred:14, pred:%reg0 %reg1029<def> = ADDrr %reg1037<kill>, %reg1028, pred:14, pred:%reg0, opt:%reg0 %reg1031<def> = SUBri %reg1026<kill>, 1, pred:14, pred:%reg0, opt:%reg0 CMPzri %reg1031, 0, pred:14, pred:%reg0, %CPSR<imp-def> %reg1038<def> = MOVr %reg1031<kill>, pred:14, pred:%re...

...ode generation/printing. WRT defining the instructions themselves: am I right in thinking that it is sensible (for instruction selection) to represent the instruction set as a collection of instructions targetting register register and register immediate, so for example I would create defs for ADDrr to match ADD %a,%b ADDri to match ADD %a, immediate I have used multiclass to achieve this. Previously I was attempting to match the opcode %a,%b,immediate general form. Clearly I also need a way to load a 32 bit constant value into a register in order to be able to address more than 64K of mem...

...4, pred:%noreg, opt:%CPSR<def> %R0<def> = MOVr %LR, pred:1, pred:%CPSR<kill>, opt:%noreg %R1<def> = EORrr %R0, %LR, pred:14, pred:%noreg, opt:%noreg %R1<def> = ANDrr %R9, %R1<kill>, pred:14, pred:%noreg, opt:%noreg %R2<def> = ADDrr %R8, %R2<kill>, pred:14, pred:%noreg, opt:%CPSR<def> %R3<def> = ADCrr %R9, %R3<kill>, pred:14, pred:%noreg, opt:%noreg, %CPSR<imp-use,kill> %R0<def> = ANDrr %R3<kill>, %R0<kill>, pred:14, pred:%noreg, opt:%noreg %R1<def>...

Hi Joseph, It's that what I want!! Sequentially, my bad saying random! Well... with the script, I remember I did something like this 15 years ago with qmail with a php script, that every email was saved in mysql and I always selected the next email addrr in the list. Going to search for this option in postfix, thanks for the tip as this is a bit offtopic of dovecot, -----Original Message----- From: dovecot [mailto:dovecot-bounces at dovecot.org] On Behalf Of Joseph Tam Sent: 30 de dezembro de 2017 07:17 To: dovecot at dovecot.org Subject: Re: Ran...

"Villmow, Micah" <Micah.Villmow at amd.com> writes: > I have this same problem in our backend. I solve it by adding a pseudo > instruction at instruction selection that transforms @R1 into R1, so > only a single pattern is required. I then can propogate the pseudo > instruction after instruction selection. What's the rationale behind this approach? It seems a bit

"Jorge Bastos" <mysql.jorge at decimal.pt> writes: > I?d like to achieve something that i don?t know if it?s possible. It's almost always possible; it really depends on how much work you want to do. > I have account info at domain.tld and when an email is received, I want to > forward it to several accounts, always in this order: > > ? Email1 at domain.tlf

Hi all, I am trying to write a back-end for LLVM where any instruction may take any type of data. I am looking for the output to be of the format: inst.type reg1,reg2 etc. Where inst is the instruction, e.g. mov and type is data-type e.g. f32 etc. I tried creating a back-end with a register class which could take i32 and f32: def GPRegs : RegisterClass <"Test",