search for: defs

Displaying 20 results from an estimated 14375 matches for "defs".

Did you mean: defa
2008 Sep 03
2
[LLVMdev] Codegen/Register allocation question.
Hi LLVMers, I have finally sorted out licensing issues and found some time, so I'm trying to port my PBQP register allocator to 2.4 in order to contribute it (if you want it). I've run into a bug that has me confused though. I'm currently failing the following assertion: llc: VirtRegMap.cpp:1733: void<unnamed>::LocalSpiller::RewriteMBB(llvm::MachineBasicBlock&,
2008 Sep 04
0
[LLVMdev] Codegen/Register allocation question.
On Sep 3, 2008, at 5:58 AM, Lang Hames wrote: > Hi LLVMers, > > I have finally sorted out licensing issues and found some time, so I'm > trying to port my PBQP register allocator to 2.4 in order to Nice! We would definitely welcome your contribution. > > contribute it (if you want it). I've run into a bug that has me > confused though. > > I'm currently
2012 Oct 25
0
[LLVMdev] RegisterCoalescing Pass seems to ignore part of CFG.
Thank for your help. You're right, merging vreg32 and vreg48 is perfectly fine, sorry I missed that. I "brute force" debuged by adding MachineFunction dump after each join, I think I found the issue : it's when vreg32 and vreg10 are merged. vreg10 only appears in BB#3, and the join only occurs in BB#3 apparently even if vreg32 lives in the 4 machine blocks After joining, there
2012 Oct 25
3
[LLVMdev] RegisterCoalescing Pass seems to ignore part of CFG.
Hi Vincent, On 25/10/2012 18:14, Vincent Lejeune wrote: > When examining the debug output of regalloc, it seems that joining 32bits reg also joins 128 parent reg. > > If I look at the : > %vreg34<def> = COPY %vreg6:sel_y; R600_Reg32:%vreg34 R600_Reg128:%vreg6 > > instructions ; it gets joined to : > 928B%vreg34<def> = COPY %vreg48:sel_y; > > when vreg6 and
2012 Oct 26
1
[LLVMdev] RegisterCoalescing Pass seems to ignore part of CFG.
Vincent, File a bug report so you can get a fix for it. Ivan On 25/10/2012 23:01, Vincent Lejeune wrote: > Thank for your help. You're right, merging vreg32 and vreg48 is perfectly fine, sorry I missed that. > I "brute force" debuged by adding MachineFunction dump after each join, I think I found the issue : it's when vreg32 and vreg10 are merged. > vreg10 only
2012 Oct 24
3
[LLVMdev] RegisterCoalescing Pass seems to ignore part of CFG.
Hi, I don't know if my llvm ir code is faulty, or if I spot a bug in the RegisterCoalescing Pass, so I'm posting my issue on the ML. Shader and print-before-all dump are given below. The interessing part is the vreg6/vreg48 reduction : before RegCoalescing, the machine code is : // BEFORE LOOP ... Some COPYs.... 400B%vreg47<def> = COPY %vreg2<kill>; R600_Reg32:%vreg47,%vreg2
2012 Oct 25
0
[LLVMdev] RegisterCoalescing Pass seems to ignore part of CFG.
Hi Vincent, On 24/10/2012 23:26, Vincent Lejeune wrote: > Hi, > > I don't know if my llvm ir code is faulty, or if I spot a bug in the RegisterCoalescing Pass, so I'm posting my issue on the ML. Shader and print-before-all dump are given below. > > The interessing part is the vreg6/vreg48 reduction : before RegCoalescing, the machine code is : > > // BEFORE LOOP >
2012 Oct 20
2
[LLVMdev] RegisterCoalescing pass crashes with ImplicitDef registers
Hi, below is an output of "llc -march=r600 -mcpu=cayman -print-before-all -debug-only=regalloc file.shader" command from llvm3.2svn. The register coalescing pass crashes when joining vreg12:sel_z with vreg13 registers, because it tries to access the interval liveness of vreg13... which is undefined. I don't know if it's a bug of the pass, or if my backend should do something
2012 Oct 25
2
[LLVMdev] RegisterCoalescing Pass seems to ignore part of CFG.
...,1168B:0)  0 at 384r updated: 512B%vreg30<def> = SETGT_INT 0, 0, 1, 0, 0, 0, %C0_X, 0, 0, 0, %vreg49, 0, 0, 0, 1, pred:%PRED_SEL_OFF, 0; R600_Reg32:%vreg30,%vreg49 Joined. Result = %C0_X 400B%vreg47<def> = COPY %C1_Y; R600_Reg32:%vreg47 Considering merging %vreg47 with %C1_Y Cannot join defs into reserved register. 416B%vreg32<def> = COPY %vreg27; R600_Reg128:%vreg32,%vreg27 Considering merging to R600_Reg128 with %vreg27 in %vreg32 RHS = %vreg32 [416r,448B:1)[448B,704r:0)[880B,1168B:0)  0 at 448B-phi 1 at 416r LHS = %vreg27 [128r,192r:0)[192r,272r:1)[272r,320r:2)[320r,416r:3)  0...
2012 Oct 25
0
[LLVMdev] RegisterCoalescing Pass seems to ignore part of CFG.
...ed: 512B%vreg30<def> = SETGT_INT 0, 0, 1, 0, 0, 0, %C0_X, 0, 0, 0, > %vreg49, 0, 0, 0, 1, pred:%PRED_SEL_OFF, 0; R600_Reg32:%vreg30,%vreg49 > Joined. Result = %C0_X > 400B%vreg47<def> = COPY %C1_Y; R600_Reg32:%vreg47 > Considering merging %vreg47 with %C1_Y > Cannot join defs into reserved register. > 416B%vreg32<def> = COPY %vreg27; R600_Reg128:%vreg32,%vreg27 > Considering merging to R600_Reg128 with %vreg27 in %vreg32 > RHS = %vreg32 [416r,448B:1)[448B,704r:0)[880B,1168B:0)  0 at 448B-phi 1 at 416r > LHS = %vreg27 [128r,192r:0)[192r,272r:1)[272r,320...
2007 Jun 26
3
[LLVMdev] Live Intervals Question
For the x86-64 target, I tried compiling a simple hello world. I don't understand the live interval information. Here's the machine instructions as dumped by LiveIntervalAnalysis: ********** MACHINEINSTRS ********** file hello.c line 3 b: 0 FNSTCW16m <fi#0>, 1, %NOREG, 0 FNSTCW16m <fi#0> 1 %mreg(0) 0 4 MOV8mi <fi#0>, 1, %NOREG, 1, 2 MOV8mi <fi#0> 1 %mreg(0) 1 2 8
2009 Jan 09
2
[LLVMdev] implicit CC register Defs cause "physreg was not killed in defining block!" assert
Hello, For my backend, I define and use a CC register similiarly to the EFLAGS register in X86 (I call it CCFLAGS). But if I make all arithmetic/logic instructions affect it ('let Defs = [CCFLAGS] in...' in InstrInfo.td) I run into // The only case we should have a dead physreg here without a killing or // instruction where we know it's dead is if it is live-in to the function // and never used. assert(!CopyMI && "physreg was not killed in defining b...
2010 Jan 18
1
[LLVMdev] JIT on ARM
Hi. I am trying to run LLVM with JIT on ARM processor (Android phone). Currently I have problems using external functions. Any call to external function crashes and gives me signal 11 (SIGSEGV) at some random address. I'm trying to run following C code: *** extern void add1(int* x); int main() { int a = 10; int b = 20; add1(&b); int c = a + b; return c; } *** It gives
2014 Apr 22
2
[LLVMdev] where is F7 opcode for TEST instruction on X86?
...r,pure_instructions testl $570425344, %eax ## imm = 0x22000000 however, i cannot find anywhere this F7 opcode is defined in lib/Target/X86/X86InstrArithmetic.td. we only have TEST defined with F6 & other opcode like below. any hint please? thanks. let isCompare = 1 in { let Defs = [EFLAGS] in { let isCommutable = 1 in { def TEST8rr : BinOpRR_F<0x84, "test", Xi8 , X86testpat, MRMSrcReg>; def TEST16rr : BinOpRR_F<0x84, "test", Xi16, X86testpat, MRMSrcReg>; def TEST32rr : BinOpRR_F<0x84, "test", Xi32, X86test...
2013 May 13
1
[LLVMdev] Problem with MachineFunctionPass and JMP
Hi ! I'm trying to modify the code in a machine function pass… I added a new basicblock and I want to add a jump to an another BB from my new BB. Here is my code : bool Obfuscation::runOnMachineFunction(MachineFunction &MF) { MachineBasicBlock *newEntry = MF.CreateMachineBasicBlock(); MF.insert(MF.begin(), newEntry); std::vector<MachineBasicBlock*> origBB;
2018 Nov 27
2
[RFC] Tablegen-erated GlobalISel Combine Rules
...Continued from the other email Removing the defs section We can potentially infer quite a lot of the defs section but it requires both a complicated ruleset and that tblgen spends processing time doing the inferencing. That processing time is potentially significant for large combiners and for that reason we need to be careful not to let inferen...
2007 Jun 26
4
[LLVMdev] Live Intervals Question
Evan, thanks for responding so quickly. On Tuesday 26 June 2007 14:11, Evan Cheng wrote: > On Jun 26, 2007, at 11:20 AM, David A. Greene wrote: > > 28 %AL<dead> = MOV8rr %reg1024<kill>, %EAX<imp-def> > > MOV8rr %mreg(2)<d> %reg1024 %mreg(17)<d> > > 32 CALL64pcrel32 <ga:printf>, %RDI<kill>, %RAX<imp-def>, %RCX<imp- > >
2018 Nov 30
2
[RFC] Tablegen-erated GlobalISel Combine Rules
> On Nov 29, 2018, at 02:02, Nicolai Hähnle <nhaehnle at gmail.com> wrote: > > On 27.11.18 19:01, Daniel Sanders wrote: >> ...Continued from the other email >> _Removing the defs section_ >> We can potentially infer quite a lot of the defs section but it requires both a complicated ruleset and that tblgen spends processing time doing the inferencing. That processing time is potentially significant for large combiners and for that reason we need to be careful not to le...
2007 Jun 26
0
[LLVMdev] Live Intervals Question
On Jun 26, 2007, at 11:20 AM, David A. Greene wrote: > > 28 %AL<dead> = MOV8rr %reg1024<kill>, %EAX<imp-def> > MOV8rr %mreg(2)<d> %reg1024 %mreg(17)<d> > 32 CALL64pcrel32 <ga:printf>, %RDI<kill>, %RAX<imp-def>, %RCX<imp- > def,dead>, > %RDX<imp-def,dead>, %RSI<imp-def,dead>, %RDI<imp-def,dead>, >
2010 Jul 28
3
[LLVMdev] Subregister coalescing
Hi all, We are working on a backend for a machine that has 4-wide vector register & ops, *but* not vector loads. All the vector register elements are directly accesible, so VI1 reg (Vector Integer 1) has I4, I5, I6 and I7 as its (integer) subregisters. Subregisters of same reg *never* overlap. Therefore, vector loads are lowered to scalar loads followed by a chain of INSERT_VECTOR_ELTs. Then