search for: constantvector

...* 0 = 0 which is not ieee compliant but i post it here in case it is interesting for someone. on my wish list there is still an option for target independent optimizations to have x * 0 = 0. -Jochen static void getIntVector(Value* value, SmallVector<int, 8>& values) { if (llvm::ConstantVector* constantVector = llvm::dyn_cast<llvm::ConstantVector>(value)) { // get components llvm::SmallVector<llvm::Constant*, 8> elements; constantVector->getVectorElements(elements); int numElements = int(elements.size()); for (int i = 0; i...

...he >> current design, but if not it would be great to eliminate this wart. > Well, I think the main reason it so reduce the size of .ll / .bc when > all operands are zero. > If the array / struct is really big then this can save a lot of space. isn't this an orthogonal issue? A ConstantVector consisting of only zeros doesn't have to be represented by storing a vast array of zero values, it could be special cased internally by setting some kind of flag. If done right, an all zero ConstantVector would then act exactly the same as every other kind of ConstantVector as far as users of...

> you can't, you can only get a ConstantAggregateZero.  This is actually kind of > annoying, and means that places expecting a ConstantArray have to remember to > also check for ConstantAggregateZero.  Perhaps there's a good reason for the > current design, but if not it would be great to eliminate this wart. Well, I think the main reason it so reduce the size of .ll / .bc when

...eter and check that the value is of a constant of the > appropriate > type and value (checking for vectors matching the predicate in the > vector case). > > For example: > > static bool ConstantFP::isExactlyValue(Value *V, double D); You can currently do this: if (const ConstantVector *CV = dyn_cast<ConstantVector>(X)) if (Constant *Splat = CV->getSplatValue()) // Now you know that Splat is a splatted value, so check it for something. -Hal > > would return true is V is ConstantFP, a splat ConstantVector, or a > ConstantDataVector with the appropri...

...gn, but if not it would be great to eliminate this wart. >>  Well, I think the main reason it so reduce the size of .ll / .bc when >>  all operands are zero. >>  If the array / struct is really big then this can save a lot of space. > > isn't this an orthogonal issue?  A ConstantVector consisting of only zeros > doesn't have to be represented by storing a vast array of zero values, it > could be special cased internally by setting some kind of flag.  If done right, > an all zero ConstantVector would then act exactly the same as every other kind > of ConstantVector...

...hich take a value as a parameter and check that the value is of a constant of the appropriate type and value (checking for vectors matching the predicate in the vector case). For example: static bool ConstantFP::isExactlyValue(Value *V, double D); would return true is V is ConstantFP, a splat ConstantVector, or a ConstantDataVector with the appropriate type. Similarly, static bool ConstantFP::isZero(Value *V); would return true if V is a ConstantFP with zero of either sign, a ConstantVector or ConstantDataVector with all zeros of either sign, or a zero initializer... Anyone have any thoughts, an...

...ld be great to eliminate this wart. >>> Well, I think the main reason it so reduce the size of .ll / .bc when >>> all operands are zero. >>> If the array / struct is really big then this can save a lot of space. >> >> isn't this an orthogonal issue? A ConstantVector consisting of only zeros >> doesn't have to be represented by storing a vast array of zero values, it >> could be special cased internally by setting some kind of flag. If done right, >> an all zero ConstantVector would then act exactly the same as every other kind >> o...

...======================================================= > --- PatternMatch.h (revision 149911) > +++ PatternMatch.h (revision 149912) > @@ -98,13 +98,6 @@ > Res = &CI->getValue(); > return true; > } > - // FIXME: Remove this. > - if (ConstantVector *CV = dyn_cast<ConstantVector>(V)) > - if (ConstantInt *CI = > - dyn_cast_or_null<ConstantInt>(CV->getSplatValue())) { > - Res = &CI->getValue(); > - return true; > - } > if (ConstantDataVector *CV = dyn_cast<ConstantD...

...t code that looks at the users is wrong. Adding an assertion should catch a lot of bugs (see r263853 and r263875) and avoid some expensive walks through uninteresting code. (The same is not true of Constant, generally. A GlobalValue's use-list will local to the GlobalValue's Module. Any ConstantVector, ConstantArray, or ConstantStruct that points at a GlobalValue will also be local to the same Module. In these cases, we also need RAUW support.) Besides catching bugs, removing use-lists from ConstantData will guarantee that the compiler output *does not* depend on the use-list order of somethin...

...========================== >> --- PatternMatch.h (revision 149911) >> +++ PatternMatch.h (revision 149912) >> @@ -98,13 +98,6 @@ >> Res = &CI->getValue(); >> return true; >> } >> - // FIXME: Remove this. >> - if (ConstantVector *CV = dyn_cast<ConstantVector>(V)) >> - if (ConstantInt *CI = >> - dyn_cast_or_null<ConstantInt>(CV->getSplatValue())) { >> - Res = &CI->getValue(); >> - return true; >> - } >> if (ConstantDataVector *CV...

...;> --- PatternMatch.h (revision 149911) >>> +++ PatternMatch.h (revision 149912) >>> @@ -98,13 +98,6 @@ >>> Res =&CI->getValue(); >>> return true; >>> } >>> - // FIXME: Remove this. >>> - if (ConstantVector *CV = dyn_cast<ConstantVector>(V)) >>> - if (ConstantInt *CI = >>> - dyn_cast_or_null<ConstantInt>(CV->getSplatValue())) { >>> - Res =&CI->getValue(); >>> - return true; >>> - } >>> if...

Hi all. I'm working on patch and I'm using unchangable ConstantInt objects. So everywhere I'm using "const ConstantInt*". But this idea came to deadlock after I tried to create ConstantVector using my vector<const ConstantInt*> collection. All because of next form of ConstantVector::get: // Note: ArrayRef declared with non-constant Constant* object. Constant *ConstantVector::get(ArrayRef<Constant*> V); What should I do in this case? Make all my ConstantInt* pointers non-...

...ith > "const" or not? >> >> Hi all. >> I'm working on patch and I'm using unchangable ConstantInt objects. > So >> everywhere I'm using "const ConstantInt*".  But this idea > came to >> deadlock after I tried to create ConstantVector using my vector<const >> ConstantInt*> collection. All because of next form of > ConstantVector::get: >> >> // Note: ArrayRef declared with non-constant Constant* object. >> Constant *ConstantVector::get(ArrayRef<Constant*> V); >> >> What s...

...quot; or not? >>> >>>  Hi all. >>>  I'm working on patch and I'm using unchangable ConstantInt > objects. So >>>  everywhere I'm using "const ConstantInt*".  But this > idea came to >>>  deadlock after I tried to create ConstantVector using my > vector<const >>>  ConstantInt*> collection. All because of next form of > ConstantVector::get: >>> >>>  // Note: ArrayRef declared with non-constant Constant* object. >>>  Constant *ConstantVector::get(ArrayRef<Constant*> V); &g...

...ing an >> assertion should catch a lot of bugs (see r263853 and r263875) and >> avoid some expensive walks through uninteresting code. >> >> (The same is not true of Constant, generally. A GlobalValue's use-list >> will local to the GlobalValue's Module. Any ConstantVector, >> ConstantArray, or ConstantStruct that points at a GlobalValue will also >> be local to the same Module. In these cases, we also need RAUW >> support.) >> >> Besides catching bugs, removing use-lists from ConstantData will >> guarantee that the compiler outp...

On Jul 26, 2011, at 9:17 PM, Talin wrote: > Here's an example of how this would be used: In the constructor for ConstantVector, there's an assert: > > assert(C->getType() == T->getElementType() && > "Initializer for vector element doesn't match vector element type!"); > > I would change this to: > > ASSERT_STRM(C->getType() == T->getElementType(), &...

...st ArrayType *T, Constant*const* Vals, unsigned NumVals); static Constant *get(const ArrayType *T, const std::vector<Constant*> &); static Constant *get(Constant*const* Vals, unsigned NumVals); static Constant *get(const std::vector<Constant*> &); } ConstantVector { static Constant *get(const VectorType *T, Constant*const* Vals, unsigned NumVals); static Constant *get(const VectorType *T, const std::vector<Constant*> &); static Constant *get(Constant*const* Vals, unsigned NumVals); static Constant *get(const std::vect...

...venience methods as IRBuilder. (In fact, the naming convention between IRBuilder and the various Constants.h classes desperately needs to be reconciled, a point which I am sure everyone is painfully aware of.) Another thing I'd like to see is for ConstantArray::get(), ConstantStruct::get() and ConstantVector::get() to have an overload that takes an iterator pair like IRBuilder's CreateGEP and CreateCall methods. Also useful for creating small structs would be overloads for ConstantStruct::get that took 1-4 arguments, instead of having to create a vector every time. Even better would be an "end...

Here's an example of how this would be used: In the constructor for ConstantVector, there's an assert: assert(C->getType() == T->getElementType() && "Initializer for vector element doesn't match vector element type!"); I would change this to: ASSERT_STRM(C->getType() == T->getElementType(), "Initializer for vector ele...

...get(Context, &NewOps[0], NewOps.size(), UserCS->getType()->isPacked()); + } else if (ConstantUnion *UserCU = dyn_cast<ConstantUnion>(UserC)) { + NewC = ConstantUnion::get(UserCU->getType(), NewOps[0]); } else if (isa<ConstantVector>(UserC)) { NewC = ConstantVector::get(&NewOps[0], NewOps.size()); } else { @@ -1015,6 +1017,11 @@ Elts.push_back(ValueList.getConstantFwdRef(Record[i], STy->getElementType(i))); V = ConstantStruct::g...