Displaying 4 results from an estimated 4 matches for "endofop".
Did you mean:
endof
2011 Oct 25
0
[LLVMdev] VLIW Ports
...e variadic "PACK" MachineInstruction. The opcode and operands of the original instruction are encoded as operands of the PACK instruction. The opcode is added as immediate following by the operands of the original instructions. Within the operands one instruction is terminated by an "EndOfOp" operand. The implicit defs/uses are also added to the PACK instruction but not used for unpacking. Unpacking reconstructs them from the TargetDescriptionInfo.
I took a look at the packing/unpacking solution of Evan and I think it is more elegant to use a derived class of MachineInstr for st...
2011 Oct 26
2
[LLVMdev] VLIW Ports
...e variadic "PACK" MachineInstruction. The opcode and operands of the original instruction are encoded as operands of the PACK instruction. The opcode is added as immediate following by the operands of the original instructions. Within the operands one instruction is terminated by an "EndOfOp" operand. The implicit defs/uses are also added to the PACK instruction but not used for unpacking. Unpacking reconstructs them from the TargetDescriptionInfo.
>
> I took a look at the packing/unpacking solution of Evan and I think it is more elegant to use a derived class of MachineIn...
2011 Oct 26
0
[LLVMdev] VLIW Ports
...e variadic "PACK"
MachineInstruction. The opcode and operands of the original instruction are
encoded as operands of the PACK instruction. The opcode is added as
immediate following by the operands of the original instructions. Within the
operands one instruction is terminated by an "EndOfOp" operand. The implicit
defs/uses are also added to the PACK instruction but not used for unpacking.
Unpacking reconstructs them from the TargetDescriptionInfo.
>
> I took a look at the packing/unpacking solution of Evan and I think it is
more elegant to use a derived class of MachineIn...
2011 Oct 24
3
[LLVMdev] VLIW Ports
On Oct 24, 2011, at 2:38 PM, Carlos Sánchez de La Lama wrote:
> Hi Evan (and all),
>
>> I think any implementation that makes a "bundle" a different entity from MachineInstr is going to be difficult to use. All of the current backend passes will have to taught to know about bundles.
>
> The approach in the patch I sent (and I believe Timo's code works similar,