search for: emitatomicbinary

On 10 May 2014, at 16:18, Tim Northover <t.p.northover at gmail.com> wrote: > Actually, I really agree there. I considered it recently, but decided > to leave it as an intrinsic for now (the new IR expansion pass happens > after most optimisations so there wouldn't be much benefit, but if we > did it earlier and the mid-end understood what an ldrex/strex meant, I > could

Hi, My target supports shift with amount 1 only i.e. to shift a value by 5 bits, I need to have a loop with shift in the body. Similarly for the unknown amount of shift we need to have a loop for shift. 1) How can I insert this loop in DAG for shift operation? 2) Is there a way where I can have a call to a function and later expand to the shift code? Which would be the

...it doing it that late precludes a lot of optimisations >> that we're interested in. I'd much rather extend the IR to support them at a >> generic level. > > I think you might be misinterpreting what the change actually is. > Currently the expansion happens post-ISel (emitAtomicBinary and > friends building the control flow and MachineInstrs directly). > > This moves it to before ISel but still late in the pipeline (actually, > you could even put it earlier: I didn't because of fears of opaque > @llvm.arm.ldrex intrinsics pessimising mid-end optimisations). &...