search for: fixups

When I use llvm-mc’s ‘-show-encoding’, it only goes as far as printing “fixups”: $ echo -e "adr r0, lbl\nnop\nlbl:" | llvm-mc -triple=thumbv7 -show-encoding Outputs: @ encoding: [A,0xa0] @ fixup A – offset: 0, value: lbl, kind: fixup_thumb_adr_pcrel_10 To find out that it is encoded as 0xa001, I can do: $ echo -e "adr r0, lbl\nnop\nlbl:"...

Hi. In my backend I get false code after using StrengthLoopReduction. In the generated code the loop index variable is multiplied by 8 (correct, everything is 64 bit aligned) to get an address offset, and the index variable is incremented by 1*8, which is not correct. It should be incremented by 1 only. The factor 8 appears again. I compared the debug output

Showing the value for the fixup requires full object code layout and relaxation, which isn't done is the text-to-text path. --Owen On Sep 12, 2012, at 5:54 PM, Greg Fitzgerald <garious at gmail.com> wrote: > When I use llvm-mc’s ‘-show-encoding’, it only goes as far as printing “fixups”: > > > $ echo -e "adr r0, lbl\nnop\nlbl:" | llvm-mc -triple=thumbv7 -show-encoding > > > Outputs: > > @ encoding: [A,0xa0] > > @ fixup A – offset: 0, value: lbl, kind: fixup_thumb_adr_pcrel_10 > > > > To find out that it is encode...

> Showing the value for the fixup requires full object > code layout and relaxation, which isn't done is the text-to-text path. Their are 2 problems I'm looking to solve: 1) How do we unit-test the integrated assembler when there are fixups? 2) Can we avoid the duplication in encoding a fixup versus encoding an immediate? In the case of ADR, the fixup was properly being shifted for Thumb mode, but the immediate was not. In my first attempt to fix this (and another developer as well), we patched the .td file, which fixed the immedi...

Hi everyone. In ARMAsmBackend.cpp, in routine DarwinARMAsmBackend::ApplyFixup() there is a curious call to getFixupKindNumBytes() - which can return 1,2, 3, or 4 depending upon the FixupKind The code in ApplyFixup() seems to be lifted from the X86. AFAIK, the initial Fixup.Offset() is always divisible by 4, at least for ARM mode - i.e. it is always at the instruction boundary. it looks like

Hm, no. I expect byte addresses - everywhere. The compiler should not know that the arch needs word addresses. During lowering LOAD and STORE get explicit conversion operations for the memory address. Even if my arch was byte addressed the code would be false/illegal. Boris > Am 09.06.2020 um 19:36 schrieb Eli Friedman <efriedma at quicinc.com>: > > Blindly guessing here,

...ply fixup information to relocations applied to data. The issue I was having was the difficulty of subclassing MCELFStreamer. Or are you saying that I should be messing with the base MCELFStreamer for a specific fixup. One of the issues I hit initially with llvm is that in terms of relocation and fixups there was an assumption of universal fixups/relocation types. That was really Utopian. These need to be all down in the Target regions and not in the base classes. Eventually we will have to change the organization of MCExpr to allow this, but I digress. If I am to subclass MCELFStreamer, that bri...

...ook at ARM/MCTargetDesc/ARMMCExpr.h ARM/ARMAsmPrinter.cpp ARM/MCTargetDesc/ARMFixupKinds.h ARM/MCTargetDesc/ARMMCCodeEmitter.cpp ARM/MCTargetDesc/ARMMachObjectWriter.cpp - Daniel > > -Jim > >> One of the issues I hit initially with llvm is that in terms of relocation and fixups there was an assumption of universal fixups/relocation types. That was really Utopian. These need to be all down in the Target regions and not in the base classes. Eventually we will have to change the organization of MCExpr to allow this, but I digress. > >> If I am to subclass MCELFStrea...

...at. There's nothing inherently MIPS-specific to having a global pointer. Daniel, are you aware of anything w/ this sort of fixup that would necessitate target-specific logic before we get to relocations? -Jim > One of the issues I hit initially with llvm is that in terms of relocation and fixups there was an assumption of universal fixups/relocation types. That was really Utopian. These need to be all down in the Target regions and not in the base classes. Eventually we will have to change the organization of MCExpr to allow this, but I digress. > If I am to subclass MCELFStreamer, tha...

...ources/tools/fakeruby.c I get the following: C:\Users\Jon\Documents\CDev\sandbox>llvm-gcc -Wall -o fakeruby.exe fakeruby.c Warning: resolving _GetModuleHandleA by linking to _GetModuleHandleA at 4 Use --enable-stdcall-fixup to disable these warnings Use --disable-stdcall-fixup to disable these fixups Warning: resolving _GetProcAddress by linking to _GetProcAddress at 8 Warning: resolving _GetEnvironmentVariableA by linking to _GetEnvironmentVariableA at 12 Warning: resolving _GetCurrentProcessId by linking to _GetCurrentProcessId at 0 ...OK, I'll take llvm-gcc's advice: C:\Users\Jon\...

The IR after LSR is: *** IR Dump After Loop Strength Reduction *** ; Preheader: entry: tail call void @fill_array(i32* getelementptr inbounds ([10 x i32], [10 x i32]* @buffer, i32 0, i32 0)) #2 br label %while.body ; Loop: while.body: ; preds = %while.body, %entry %lsr.iv = phi i32 [ %lsr.iv.next, %while.body ], [ 0, %entry ] %uglygep = getelementptr

Hallo, I''d like to get some explanations ... # btrfs filesystem show Label: ''MMedia'' uuid: 120b036a-883f-46aa-bd9a-cb6a1897c8d2 Total devices 3 FS bytes used 3.80TB devid 1 size 1.82TB used 1.29TB path /dev/sdg1 devid 3 size 1.81TB used 1.29TB path /dev/sdc1 devid 2 size 1.81TB used 1.28TB path /dev/sdb1 Btrfs Btrfs v0.19 # btrfs filesystem df /srv/MM

...s to i64), i64 20) ) to i32) }>, section "__TEXT,__swift3_fieldmd, regular, no_dead_strip", align 4 …on a couple of targets, it seems to produce invalid MC graphs that then fail to compile. My chosen platform is AVR but it looks like it probably produces strange fixups on MIPS too. I was initially chatting to the AVR rust team about this but I’m not sure it’s an AVR only problem. I’d like some help with understanding why these fixups are being created. When compiled on AVR, I get the error "LLVM ERROR: expected relocatable expression”. If I compile to asm, I...

Hi All, Does anyone knows what doest this output means? [root@serverxen ~]# xm list Name                                      ID Mem(MiB) VCPUs State   Time(s) Domain-0                                   0     3202     8 r-----   5220.1 vm1                                  3     4095     2 -b----   3529.2 vm2                                  5     8191     4 -b----    399.0 [root@serverxen ~]# xm

For a target that hasn't implemented branch relaxation (yet), does anyone know what is the preferred way to report an error if a fixup cannot be applied because, for example, the destination of a branch is out of range? I suppose I could use asserts just like AArch64 is doing but that won't stop the assembler of emitting a branch to an undesired location in release builds. Does anyone see

...earch for "out of range pc-relative fixup value"). -David From: llvmdev-bounces at cs.uiuc.edu [mailto:llvmdev-bounces at cs.uiuc.edu] On Behalf Of Matheus Almeida Sent: Tuesday, December 03, 2013 5:37 AM To: llvmdev at cs.uiuc.edu Subject: [LLVMdev] Reporting errors when applying fixups For a target that hasn't implemented branch relaxation (yet), does anyone know what is the preferred way to report an error if a fixup cannot be applied because, for example, the destination of a branch is out of range? I suppose I could use asserts just like AArch64 is doing but that wo...

Hi, I am trying to undertand which code in LLVM patches the fixups generated by assembler. Here is what I am doing: I use "llvm-mc" to compile X86 assembly code, like below: $ echo "jmp 5000" | ./bin/llvm-mc -assemble -triple=i386 -show-encoding -x86-asm-syntax=att -output-asm-variant=1 .text jmp 5000 # encoding:...

On Sat, Sep 23, 2017 at 9:55 AM, Godala, Bhargav-reddy < Bhargav-reddy.Godala at amd.com> wrote: > > With regards > Bhargav Reddy Godala > Software Engineer 2 > Bangalore, India > E-mail: Bhargav-reddy.Godala at amd.com Ext 30678 > > > > On 23-Sep-2017, at 9:27 PM, Daniel Berlin <dberlin at dberlin.org> wrote: > > > > On Sat, Sep 23, 2017 at

With regards Bhargav Reddy Godala Software Engineer 2 Bangalore, India E-mail: Bhargav-reddy.Godala at amd.com<mailto:Bhargav-reddy.Godala at amd.com> Ext 30678 On 23-Sep-2017, at 9:27 PM, Daniel Berlin <dberlin at dberlin.org<mailto:dberlin at dberlin.org>> wrote: On Sat, Sep 23, 2017 at 8:38 AM, Godala, Bhargav-reddy via llvm-dev <llvm-dev at

Hi Everyone, I'm working Chromium targeting Windows on ARM64 platform. As a part of this work I ran into an issue related to llvm in Swiftshader. Currently fixup_aarch64_movw relocation type is not supported for COFF ARM64 (AArch64WinCOFFObjectWriter). As far as I see, Microsoft hasn't defined indicator for this relocation type. I haven't seen documented anywhere. For AArch32