search for: dui0489c

...ue them for execution under wait conditions, *then* fetch the > ISB? This would be a *really* weird implementation, but would it be legal > according to this spec? If so, the ISB provides *no* guarantees.) > > Reference: > http://infocenter.arm.com/help/index.jsp?topic=/com.arm.doc.dui0489c/CIHGHHIE.html You've actually linked to the assembler (as in "armasm") reference manual there. The architectural documentation of these barriers is better, though still not airtight in my opinion. From section A3.8.3, the bit about "program order" is new, and it's after...

...ctions for simple vector operations like vector addition, multiplication, etc. so for these I imagine the implementation would consist of just outputting the correct instruction. However, for NEON instructions like the reciprocal step (see http://infocenter.arm.com/help/index.jsp?topic=/com.arm.doc.dui0489c/CIHDIACI.html) it is unlikely that there is a corresponding PowerPC vector instruction, so these will need to be emulated, yes. - Stan On 2 October 2013 04:14, Hal Finkel <hfinkel at anl.gov> wrote: > Stan, > > Do you mean that you want to emulate the ARM NEON intrinsics on Powe...

...ons/Xcode.app/Contents/Developer/Toolchains/XcodeDefault.xctoolchain/usr/bin/clang -arch armv7 ./src/asm.s -o asm.o ./src/asm.s:30:5: error: instruction requires a CPU feature not currently enabled add r2, pc, r2 According to ARM <http://infocenter.arm.com/help/index.jsp?topic=/com.arm.doc.dui0489c/Cihcjfjg.html> specification: [http://infocenter.arm.com/help/topic/com.arm.doc.common/images/triangle_down.png]Use of PC and SP in Thumb instructions In most of these instructions, you cannot use PC (R15) for Rd, or any operand. The exceptions are: * you can use PC for Rn in 32-bit Thumb ADD...

On 7/16/14, 6:09 PM, sgundapa wrote: > I see a couple of issues here. > > If I include .S files for ARM, the –no-integrated-as path complains about > Assembler errors. > > The integrated-as path works fine though. > These are very likely just differences between the old ARM assembler syntax and the new 'Unified' syntax. Can you use an assembler that accepts UAL

Hi, I've got an assembly file which used to compile with previous clang versions. However with 4.2 I get the following error: admin$ /Applications/Xcode.app/Contents/Developer/Toolchains/XcodeDefault.xctoolchain/usr/bin/clang -arch armv7 ./src/asm.s -o asm.o ./src/asm.s:30:5: error: instruction requires a CPU feature not currently enabled add r2, pc, r2 According to ARM

On 24 June 2014 01:55, Philip Reames <listmail at philipreames.com> wrote: > > On 06/19/2014 09:35 AM, Yi Kong wrote: >> >> Hi all, >> >> I'm currently working on implementing ACLE extensions for ARM. There >> are some memory barrier intrinsics, i.e.__dsb and __isb that require >> the compiler not to reorder instructions around their

Stan, Do you mean that you want to emulate the ARM NEON intrinsics on PowerPC? -Hal ----- Original Message ----- > > > Hello LLVM Devs, > > > Thanks for helping me previously to cross-compile for ARM, I managed > to get a working toolchain and am currently having fun compiling > different toy problems and running them on a pandaboard. > > As part of my

Hello LLVM Devs, Thanks for helping me previously to cross-compile for ARM, I managed to get a working toolchain and am currently having fun compiling different toy problems and running them on a pandaboard. As part of my research I am trying to implement the ARM NEON Intrinsics in the PowerPC LLVM backend. I am still at the beginning of my efforts and am not yet familiar with either the ARM or

...ctor operations like vector > addition, multiplication, etc. so for these I imagine the implementation > would consist of just outputting the correct instruction. However, for NEON > instructions like the reciprocal step (see > http://infocenter.arm.com/help/index.jsp?topic=/com.arm.doc.dui0489c/CIHDIACI.html) > it > is unlikely that there is a corresponding PowerPC vector instruction, so > these will need to be emulated, yes. > > - Stan > > > On 2 October 2013 04:14, Hal Finkel <hfinkel at anl.gov> wrote: > > > Stan, > > > > Do you m...