search for: filterclass

...lt;3>; def Format_predf : IFormat<4>; Addrr : { Addrr, Addri, Addrr_pt, Addrr_pf, .. , ..} Addri : { Addrr, Addri, Addri_pt, Addri_pf,.. > Do something like this: > > def getPredicatedOpcode : InstrMapping { > // Only include instructions form the PredRel class. > let FilterClass = "PredRel"; > > // Instructions with the same BaseOpcode field form a row. > let RowFields = ["BaseOpcode"]; > > // Instructions with the same predicate sense form a column. > let ColFields = ["PredSense"]; > > // The key column is...

...'ADD', we can have another transformation like this - ADD--- ---> ADDtrue -----> ADDtru_new (predicate new form of true) \-----> ADDfalse -----> ADDfalse_new (predicate new form of false) // Define Predicate New relation def getPredNewOpcode : InstrMapping { let FilterClass = "PredNewRel"; let RowFields = ["BaseOpcode"]; // ColFields is a list of flags/attributes of the instructions. let ColFields = ["DotNewType", "PredSense"]; // Here 'DotNewType' of the KeyCol is "" and Predsense can be either 'tr...

...y translates into > a unique column into the mapping table. My point is that you don't need to define additional structure when you can just use the record fields. >> def getPredicatedOpcode : InstrMapping { >> // Only include instructions form the PredRel class. >> let FilterClass = "PredRel"; >> >> // Instructions with the same BaseOpcode field form a row. >> let RowFields = ["BaseOpcode"]; >> >> // Instructions with the same predicate sense form a column. >> let ColFields = ["PredSense"]; >> &gt...

...er transformation like this - > > ADD--- ---> ADDtrue -----> ADDtru_new (predicate new form of true) > \-----> ADDfalse -----> ADDfalse_new (predicate new form of false) > > // Define Predicate New relation > def getPredNewOpcode : InstrMapping { > let FilterClass = "PredNewRel"; > > let RowFields = ["BaseOpcode"]; > > // ColFields is a list of flags/attributes of the instructions. > let ColFields = ["DotNewType", "PredSense"]; > > // Here 'DotNewType' of the KeyCol is "" and...

...s needed. You don't want to be limited to a single 'IFormat' as a column identifier, there can be many different types of relationships between instructions. Do something like this: def getPredicatedOpcode : InstrMapping { // Only include instructions form the PredRel class. let FilterClass = "PredRel"; // Instructions with the same BaseOpcode field form a row. let RowFields = ["BaseOpcode"]; // Instructions with the same predicate sense form a column. let ColFields = ["PredSense"]; // The key column is the unpredicated instructions. let Ke...

...ansformation like this - > > ADD--- ---> ADDtrue -----> ADDtru_new (predicate new form of true) > \-----> ADDfalse -----> ADDfalse_new (predicate new form of > false) > > // Define Predicate New relation > def getPredNewOpcode : InstrMapping { > let FilterClass = "PredNewRel"; > > let RowFields = ["BaseOpcode"]; > > // ColFields is a list of flags/attributes of the instructions. > let ColFields = ["DotNewType", "PredSense"]; > > // Here 'DotNewType' of the KeyCol is "" and...

Hal, that’s a good point. There are more manually-maintained tables in the X86 backend that should probably be tablegened: the memory-folding tables and ReplaceableInstrs, to name a couple. If you have ideas on how to get these auto-generated, please let us know. From: llvm-dev [mailto:llvm-dev-bounces at lists.llvm.org] On Behalf Of Hal Finkel via llvm-dev Sent: Wednesday, November 23, 2016

...ue ADD_pf : predicate false We can define the relationship between the non-predicated instructions and their predicate formats as follows: def getPredOpcode : InstrMapping { // InstrMapping is a new class defined in Target.td // Used to filter instructions that have this kind of relationship let FilterClass = "PredRel"; // Instructions with the same BaseOpcode value form a row. let RowFields = ["BaseOpcode"]; // Instructions with the same predicate sense form a column. let ColFields = ["PredSense"]; // The key column is the unpredicated instructions. let KeyCol = [&quo...

Hi Everyone, After some more thoughts to the Jacob's suggestion of using multiclasses for Opcode mapping, this is what I have come up with. Please take a look at the design below and let me know if you have any suggestions/questions. I have tried to keep the design target independent so that other targets could benefit from it. 1) The idea is to add 3 new classes into

...ansformation like this - > > ADD--- ---> ADDtrue -----> ADDtru_new (predicate new form of true) > \-----> ADDfalse -----> ADDfalse_new (predicate new form of > false) > > // Define Predicate New relation > def getPredNewOpcode : InstrMapping { > let FilterClass = "PredNewRel"; > > let RowFields = ["BaseOpcode"]; > > // ColFields is a list of flags/attributes of the instructions. > let ColFields = ["DotNewType", "PredSense"]; > > // Here 'DotNewType' of the KeyCol is "" and...

Hello LLVM, My target has a complex relaxation hierarchy. Perhaps a modest TableGen extension would help consolidate most of the work involved in choosing a relaxed opcode. I also notice the x86 relaxation code with a comment wondering if TableGen could improve life. Does the following outline sound interesting? 1) Add a new field of type 'Instruction' to the Instruction class called

Jyotsna, I hadn't been following this, so I apologize if this has already been provided, but can you give a quick example of how this functionality is used? Thanks in advance, Hal On Tue, 28 Aug 2012 13:01:17 -0500 "Jyotsna Verma" <jverma at codeaurora.org> wrote: > Hi Jakob, > > Here is the first draft of the patch to add TableGen backend support > for the

Hi Jakob, Here is the first draft of the patch to add TableGen backend support for the instruction mapping tables. Please take a look and let me know your suggestions. As of now, I create one mapping table per relation which results into a long .inc file. So, I'm planning to combine everything into a single table and will include APIs (one per relation) to query from this table. Thanks,