search for: c13012

...en you say modifying alloca to global references seems a more robust way of doing it. Could you elaborate on this? Thanks A. -----Original Message----- From: Chris Lattner [mailto:sabre at nondot.org] Sent: Tuesday, April 15, 2008 8:29 PM To: LLVM Developers Mailing List Cc: Alireza Moshtaghi - C13012 Subject: Re: [LLVMdev] overlay attribute On Apr 10, 2008, at 10:44 AM, <Alireza.Moshtaghi at microchip.com> <Alireza.Moshtaghi at microchip.com > wrote: > I would like to make the following target specific modifications to > clang and would like to get some advice from expert...

Hi Ali, I assume this is primarily for interrupt function handling? If so, I have a few ideas to bounce your direction if you're interested. -j On Aug 6, 2009, at 3:32 PM, Alireza.Moshtaghi at microchip.com wrote: > I need to perform call graph analysis (after all modules are merged) > to > find which function calls which, and depending on the attributes that > each

Hi, > What we are trying to do is to add new attributes (more maybe added > later): > > > sign_ext_from_i8, sign_ext_from_i16 > > zero_ext_from_i8, zero_ext_from_i16 > > to function definition so (assuming that both caller and callee are > generated in the same front-end) the caller will know if the callee has > already extended the return value or not, then

On Apr 10, 2008, at 10:44 AM, <Alireza.Moshtaghi at microchip.com> <Alireza.Moshtaghi at microchip.com > wrote: > I would like to make the following target specific modifications to > clang and would like to get some advice from experts. Ok. cfe-dev might be more appropriate for clang questions, but... > > 1) My target supports very poor stack access so we implement

On Wed, 19 Mar 2008, Duncan Sands wrote: >> How can I build the front-end to generate 16-bit integers? > > Please clarify your question. > If you are asking how to build llvm-gcc for a 16 bit target, > I think the answer is: (1) gcc itself doesn't support 16 bit > targets; (2) llvm doesn't currently support any 16 bit targets > (but could with a little work). So

I need to perform call graph analysis (after all modules are merged) to find which function calls which, and depending on the attributes that each function has and what functions call it, I may need to clone it and modify some of calls to that function to call the cloned function. Currently we are doing this in few acrobatic moves that span from an llvm-ld pass (to do call graph analysis) all the

I would like to make the following target specific modifications to clang and would like to get some advice from experts. 1) My target supports very poor stack access so we implement "static stack". In this model, all local variables will have static storage class. I think I can take care of this in the clang::CGDecl.cpp::CodeGenFunction::EmitBlockVarDecl() 2) To improve memory usage,

...clear enough. Please do provide your feedback, hopefully we can submit patches for these to be included in llvm-2.8 Thanks, -Ali > -----Original Message----- > From: Sanjiv Kumar Gupta - I00171 > Sent: Wednesday, August 26, 2009 11:41 AM > To: Jim Grosbach > Cc: Alireza Moshtaghi - C13012; clattner at apple.com; llvmdev at cs.uiuc.edu > Subject: Re: [LLVMdev] ISRs for PIC16 [was [llvm]r79631 ...] > > Jim Grosbach wrote: > > Hi Ali, > > > > Thanks for bringing this up. You're definitely under very tight design > > constraints from the hardware. I...

Some targets want to do the promotion in the callee and some in the caller. Now what you are discussing in your bug is we shouldn't do in both... Now the tricky part is that many targets (not for the sake of promotion, but for the sake of performance) return a smaller value in a larger register (say if the function is to return char, they return it in 32 bit register); So they are effectively

Jim Grosbach wrote: > Hi Ali, > > Thanks for bringing this up. You're definitely under very tight design > constraints from the hardware. I can certainly sympathize. Jim, First of all, thank you very much for understanding every detail of the problem at our hand and coming up with a solution that addresses every aspect of it. IMO, given the constraints, this is probably the best