search for: doinstructionselection

...es directly instead of returning the desired replacement. So I'm working on fixing the undefined behaviour I described in llvm.org/PR26808. As part of this, we need to stop looking into deleted SDNodes to check if they were, in fact, deleted. A big place that we do this is in SelectionDAGISel::DoInstructionSelection, where we can find this helpful comment that came with the commit that added the check for DELETED_NODE: SelectionDAGISel.cpp says: > // FIXME: This is pretty gross. 'Select' should be changed to not return > // anything at all and this code should be nuked with a tactical strike....

...eturning the desired replacement. > > So I'm working on fixing the undefined behaviour I described in > llvm.org/PR26808. As part of this, we need to stop looking into deleted > SDNodes to check if they were, in fact, deleted. A big place that we do > this is in SelectionDAGISel::DoInstructionSelection, where we can find > this helpful comment that came with the commit that added the check for > DELETED_NODE: > > SelectionDAGISel.cpp says: >> // FIXME: This is pretty gross. 'Select' should be changed to not return >> // anything at all and this code should be nuke...

...replacement. >> >> So I'm working on fixing the undefined behaviour I described in >> llvm.org/PR26808. As part of this, we need to stop looking into deleted >> SDNodes to check if they were, in fact, deleted. A big place that we do >> this is in SelectionDAGISel::DoInstructionSelection, where we can find >> this helpful comment that came with the commit that added the check for >> DELETED_NODE: >> >> SelectionDAGISel.cpp says: >>> // FIXME: This is pretty gross. 'Select' should be changed to not return >>> // anything at all and...

...t;> >>> So I'm working on fixing the undefined behaviour I described in >>> llvm.org/PR26808. As part of this, we need to stop looking into deleted >>> SDNodes to check if they were, in fact, deleted. A big place that we do >>> this is in SelectionDAGISel::DoInstructionSelection, where we can find >>> this helpful comment that came with the commit that added the check for >>> DELETED_NODE: >>> >>> SelectionDAGISel.cpp says: >>>> // FIXME: This is pretty gross. 'Select' should be changed to not return >>>>...

...hat implicit operands normally come from the instruction definitions, but you can add whatever other implicit operands you'd like. We often do this to handle calls, returns, etc. - we add implicit operands corresponding to parameters and return values. My thought was that, in SelectionDAGISel::DoInstructionSelection, after the call to Select, Node should have been mutated to be the associated machine instruction. We can then have a target hook which then updates the node operands to also have the implicit register dependencies. However, that does not explain how to actually do that: At the MI level, you can al...

...nst*) /home/nancy/rpp_llvm/llvm-project/llvm/lib/Target/ARM/ARMISelDAGToDAG.cpp:2074:0 #9 0x0000000002dbc3ad (anonymous namespace)::ARMDAGToDAGISel::Select(llvm::SDNode*) /home/nancy/rpp_llvm/llvm-project/llvm/lib/Target/ARM/ARMISelDAGToDAG.cpp:3781:0 #10 0x000000000559dc93 llvm::SelectionDAGISel::DoInstructionSelection() /home/nancy/rpp_llvm/llvm-project/llvm/lib/CodeGen/SelectionDAG/SelectionDAGISel.cpp:1068:0 #11 0x000000000559cfdd llvm::SelectionDAGISel::CodeGenAndEmitDAG() /home/nancy/rpp_llvm/llvm-project/llvm/lib/CodeGen/SelectionDAG/SelectionDAGISel.cpp:907:0 #12 0x000000000559b467 llvm::SelectionDAGISel::...

Dear list, git checkout llvmorg-8.0.0 -b llvm8.0 cmake -G "Unix Makefiles" ../llvm-project/llvm -DCMAKE_BUILD_TYPE=Debug -DLLVM_ENABLE_PROJECTS="clang;lld" -DLLVM_TARGETS_TO_BUILD="X86;NVPTX;AMDGPU;ARM;AArch64" [arm.cpp] #define vst4_lane_f16(__p0, __p1, __p2) __extension__ ({ \ float16x4x4_t __s1 = __p1; \ __builtin_neon_vst4_lane_v(__p0, __s1.val[0],

> Mehdi Amini <mehdi.amini at apple.com> 於 2016年11月30日 上午5:14 寫道： > >> >> On Nov 29, 2016, at 4:02 AM, Bekket McClane via llvm-dev <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org <mailto:llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org>> wrote: >> >> Hi, >> Though there exists lots of researches on parallelizing or scheduling optimization passes, If you open up the time matrices of