search for: clearregisterclass

Displaying 4 results from an estimated 4 matches for "clearregisterclass".

Did you mean: clearregisterclasses
2013 Mar 14
0
[LLVMdev] initial putback for implementing mips16/nomips16 attributes - please review
...---------- diff --git a/include/llvm/Target/TargetLowering.h b/include/llvm/Target/TargetLowering.h index e3e5737..e45b792 100644 --- a/include/llvm/Target/TargetLowering.h +++ b/include/llvm/Target/TargetLowering.h @@ -958,6 +958,14 @@ protected: RegClassForVT[VT.SimpleTy] = RC; } + /// clearRegisterClasses - remove all register classes + void clearRegisterClasses() { + for (unsigned i = 0 ; i<array_lengthof(RegClassForVT); i++) + RegClassForVT[i] = 0; + while (!AvailableRegClasses.empty()) + AvailableRegClasses.pop_back(); + } + /// findRepresentativeClass - Return the large...
2013 Mar 13
1
[LLVMdev] void TargetLoweringBase::computeRegisterProperties
It seems like this routine is not allocating any memory and could just be called a second time. Does anyone know if that is true? I looked at a bunch of it but did not want to create a memory leak by calling it again if it was doing a "new" indirectly somewhere. I've created a clearRegisterClasses method so that we can start all over. Then I would add register classes again and call computeRegisterProperties. This is so I can switch processor major modes on a function basis. Tia. Reed
2013 Apr 01
0
[LLVMdev] proposed change to class BasicTTI and dual mode mips16/32 working
.../Mips/MipsSEISelLowering.cpp +++ b/lib/Target/Mips/MipsSEISelLowering.cpp @@ -27,6 +27,9 @@ EnableMipsTailCalls("enable-mips-tail-calls", cl::Hidden, MipsSETargetLowering::MipsSETargetLowering(MipsTargetMachine &TM) : MipsTargetLowering(TM) { // Set up the register classes + + clearRegisterClasses(); + addRegisterClass(MVT::i32, &Mips::CPURegsRegClass); if (HasMips64) diff --git a/lib/Target/Mips/MipsSubtarget.cpp b/lib/Target/Mips/MipsSubtarget.cpp index e11e5d1..4f56bd5 100644 --- a/lib/Target/Mips/MipsSubtarget.cpp +++ b/lib/Target/Mips/MipsSubtarget.cpp @@ -11,29 +11,47 @@...
2013 Apr 01
3
[LLVMdev] proposed change to class BasicTTI and dual mode mips16/32 working
On Thu, Mar 28, 2013 at 12:22 PM, Nadav Rotem <nrotem at apple.com> wrote: > IMHO the right way to handle target function attributes is to > re-initialize the target machine and TTI for every function (if the > attributes changed). Do you have another solution in mind ? I don't really understand this. TargetMachine and TTI may be quite expensive to initialize. Doing so for