Displaying 6 results from an estimated 6 matches for "fp_to_inthelp".
Did you mean:
fp_to_inthelper
2012 Jan 24
0
[LLVMdev] Best way to interface with MSVC _ftol2 runtime function for fptoui?
...d is that fptosi and fptoui both seem to always emit
a redundant SSE load/store when SSE is enabled, because of the check
at Target/X86/X86ISelLowering.cpp:7948. Can this check be easily
modified so it doesn't store if the operand is already in memory and
not actually in an SSE register? Should FP_TO_INTHelper switch over to
using CVTTS?2SI insns when SSE is available?
-Joe
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: llvm-ftol2.diff
Type: application/octet-stream
Size: 13256 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/attachments/...
2012 Jan 20
2
[LLVMdev] Best way to interface with MSVC _ftol2 runtime function for fptoui?
On Jan 20, 2012, at 1:58 PM, Joe Groff wrote:
> The integer runtime functions (_allmul, _alldiv, etc. for 64-bit
> integer arithmetic) all appear to be straight-up stdcall. _ftol2 is
> the only weird one. (There is an _ftol routine with the same calling
> convention as _ftol2, but AFAIK it's only for backward compatibility
> with older MSVC runtimes.) I'm far from an MSVC
2012 Jan 25
2
[LLVMdev] Best way to interface with MSVC _ftol2 runtime function for fptoui?
...fptoui both seem to always emit
> a redundant SSE load/store when SSE is enabled, because of the check
> at Target/X86/X86ISelLowering.cpp:7948. Can this check be easily
> modified so it doesn't store if the operand is already in memory and
> not actually in an SSE register? Should FP_TO_INTHelper switch over to
> using CVTTS?2SI insns when SSE is available?
When SSE is available, x87 registers are only ever used for f80.
/jakob
2009 May 21
0
[LLVMdev] [PATCH] Add new phase to legalization to handle vector operations
On Wed, May 20, 2009 at 4:55 PM, Dan Gohman <gohman at apple.com> wrote:
> Can you explain why you chose the approach of using a new pass?
> I pictured removing LegalizeDAG's type legalization code would
> mostly consist of finding all the places that use TLI.getTypeAction
> and just deleting code for handling its Expand and Promote. Are you
> anticipating something more
2009 May 20
2
[LLVMdev] [PATCH] Add new phase to legalization to handle vector operations
On May 20, 2009, at 1:34 PM, Eli Friedman wrote:
> On Wed, May 20, 2009 at 1:19 PM, Eli Friedman
> <eli.friedman at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Per subject, this patch adding an additional pass to handle vector
>>
>> operations; the idea is that this allows removing the code from
>>
>> LegalizeDAG that handles illegal types, which should be a significant
2009 May 21
2
[LLVMdev] [PATCH] Add new phase to legalization to handle vector operations
...DValue Store2 = DAG.getStore(Store1, dl, DAG.getConstant(0, MVT::i32),
+ OffsetSlot, NULL, 0);
+ return BuildFILD(Op, MVT::i64, Store2, StackSlot, DAG);
}
std::pair<SDValue,SDValue> X86TargetLowering::
-FP_TO_SINTHelper(SDValue Op, SelectionDAG &DAG) {
+FP_TO_INTHelper(SDValue Op, SelectionDAG &DAG, bool IsSigned) {
DebugLoc dl = Op.getDebugLoc();
- assert(Op.getValueType().getSimpleVT() <= MVT::i64 &&
- Op.getValueType().getSimpleVT() >= MVT::i16 &&
+
+ MVT DstTy = Op.getValueType();
+
+ if (!IsSigned) {
+ assert(DstT...