search for: addrspaces

Is copy.0 semantically equivalent to copy.1 in the following example? define void @copy.0(i8 addrspace(1)* addrspace(1)* %src, i8 addrspace(1)* addrspace(1)* %dst) { entry: %val = load i8 addrspace(1)* addrspace(1)* %src store i8 addrspace(1)* %val, i8 addrspace(1)* addrspace(1)* %dst ret void } define void @copy.1(i8 addrspace(1)* addrspace(1)* %src, i8 addrspace(1)* addrspace(1)* %dst)

> On Dec 8, 2014, at 5:12 PM, Sanjoy Das <sanjoy at playingwithpointers.com> wrote: > > Partially answering my own question, in general these are not > equivalent because LLVM allows for pointers in different address > spaces to have different sizes. However, are they equivalent if > pointers in addrspace(1) have the same size as pointers in > addrspace(0)? > >

Hi, I'm working on OpenCL and I'm using clang as compiler (based on clang 3.7.0). I have a issue, I'm generating a bitcode file (that I can print before before the generation). But when I'm trying to read it again with clang, I have this issue: "error: Invalid record" How can I managed to know where it comes from? Thank you, Romaric Here is what is print before the

Hello, LLVM devs. I have the following IR: %x = alloca i32, align 4 %p = alloca i32*, align 8 store i32* %x, i32** %p, align 8 Now I change module's data layout and run InferAddressSpacePass. This turns that piece of code into %x = alloca i32, align 4, addrspace(1) %p = alloca i32*, align 8, addrspace(1) store i32 addrspace(1)* %x, i32* addrspace(1)* %p, align 8 But Verifier

Hi Tom, Matt, I'm running into strange issues with the cos test (piglit generated_tests/cl/builtin/math/builtin-float-cos-1.0.generated.c) I have been seeing random failures (incorrect results) for some time and tried to investigate. the weird part is that the failures are not 100% reproducible, sometimes the tests pass, or partly pass (it's usually float8 and float16 subtests that

Hello, With the following reduced test case, cmd "opt -always-inline t.ll" crashes after inlining. Notice that byval argument %a will be remapped to %1 below, and consequently produces an illegal store. %1 = alloca i32, align 4 store i32 * %1, i32 addrspace(1)** %a.addr, align 8 Looks like Inliner assumes that byval arguments are from address space 0. Or this is just a bug in inliner?

We'd like to be able to vary the latency of our load instructions based on what address space is being loaded from. I was thinking I could do this by overriding getOperandLatency in our target, but I'm wondering if the addrspace info is available when instructions are scheduled? For example, I have this in our llvm IR: %0 = load i32 addrspace(4)* @answer, align 4 store i32 %0, i32*

OK, I’ve hit one more existing regression test that I’m weary of: define void @test2_addrspacecast() { %A = alloca %T %B = alloca %T %a = addrspacecast %T* %A to i8 addrspace(1)* %b = addrspacecast %T* %B to i8 addrspace(1)* call void @llvm.memcpy.p1i8.p0i8.i64(i8 addrspace(1)* %a, i8* bitcast (%T* @G to i8*), i64 124, i32 4, i1 false) call void

I am attempting to get indexing code generation working with my backend. However, it seems that the addresses being calculated is being multiplied by the width of the data type. define void @ test_input_index_constant_int(i32 addrspace(11)* %input, i32 addrspace(11)* %result) { entry: %input.addr = alloca i32 addrspace(11)* ; <i32 addrspace(11)**> [#uses=2]

Hi Mehdi, Thanks for the reply - I’ve finally got round to trying to fix this based on your suggestion. I’ve got something that mostly works, but I just wanted to double-check something about the regression tests before I post a patch. > The memcpy is supposed to be equivalent to a sequence of load and store. Here we are just failing to keep the property that the load is performed through

It is problematic when byval argument is not from address space 0. When the default alloca address space is 0, should we consider this IR illegal? define internal i32 @bar(i32 addrspace(1)* byval %a) alwaysinline From: Reid Kleckner [mailto:rnk at google.com] Sent: Tuesday, September 25, 2018 2:38 PM To: Pan, Wei <wei.pan at intel.com> Cc: llvm-dev <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org>

On Fri, Mar 25, 2016 at 02:22:11PM -0400, Jan Vesely wrote: > Hi Tom, Matt, > > I'm working on a project that needs few coherent atomic operations (HSA > mode: load, store, compare-and-swap) for std::atomic_uint in HCC. > > the attached patch implements atomic compare and swap for SI+ > (untested). I tried to stay within what was available, but there are > few issues

It's not clear what is actually wrong from your original message, I think you need to give some more information as to what you are doing: Example source, what target GPU, compiler error messages or other evidence of "it's wrong" (llvm IR, disassembly, etc) ... -- Mats On 8 April 2016 at 09:55, Liu Xin via llvm-dev <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: > I built it

Hi Tom, Matt, I'm working on a project that needs few coherent atomic operations (HSA mode: load, store, compare-and-swap) for std::atomic_uint in HCC. the attached patch implements atomic compare and swap for SI+ (untested). I tried to stay within what was available, but there are few issues that I was unsure how to address: 1.) it currently uses v2i32 for both input and output. This

Hello, Calling `replaceUsesOfWith` with a value in a different addrspace does not keep the addrspace of a GEP consistent. Is this known? Is this a bug or expected behaviour? Minimal counterexample link <https://gist.github.com/bollu/152ba5e1c20c03c7fc6d8c7b23ba828f> Reproduced here: #include <iostream> #include "llvm/ADT/APFloat.h" #include

This sounds right to me. If there is no objection, I will implement a patch to enforce this in langref and IR verifier. -----Original Message----- From: Friedman, Eli [mailto:efriedma at codeaurora.org] Sent: Tuesday, September 25, 2018 3:07 PM To: Pan, Wei <wei.pan at intel.com>; Reid Kleckner <rnk at google.com> Cc: llvm-dev <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> Subject: Re:

Hello, list I am not quite sure if what I'm experiencing is a bug or intentional behavior. In the code below the result of a function call is a deopt arg to llvm.experimental.gc.statepoint (http://llvm.org/docs/Statepoints.html#llvm-experimental-gc-statepoint-intrinsic). Therefore a Stack Map containing location of this variable is created upon code generation. Here's the complete

Hi, For a long time we've been having a problem we've been working around in OpenCL where loads are moving across an intrinsic used for a barrier. Attached is the testcase, and the result of opt -S -basicaa -gvn on it. This example is essentially this: void foo(global float2* result, local float2* restrict data0, ...) { int id = get_local_id(0); // ... data0[id] = ...;

Given a pointer, does any addrspacecast affect the pointer's dereferenceablity ? For example, %pm = addrspaacecast float addrspacecast(n)* %pn to float addrspacecast(m)* %r = load float addrspace(m)* %pm In another word. the question is whether the following is true ? isDereferenceablePointer(pn) == isDereferenceablePointer(pm) [Note that the function is defined as

Hi, On 13-11-15 19:51, Tom Stellard wrote: > On Fri, Nov 13, 2015 at 02:46:52PM +0100, Hans de Goede wrote: >> Hi All, >> >> So as discussed I've started working on a TGSI backend for >> llvm to use as a way to get compute going on nouveau (and other gpu-s). >> >> I'm still learning all the ins and outs of llvm so I do not have >> much to show