search for: galanov

On Jun 2, 2011, at 12:58 PM, Bill Wendling wrote: > On Jun 2, 2011, at 3:53 AM, Galanov, Sergey wrote: > >> Hi Bill. >> >> Thank you very much! Now I see my understanding was incorrect :) A dependence from a single physreg-defining instruction (like CMP or TEST) is allowed to be shared in several instructions unless that register is not clobbered (and this is wh...

On Jun 3, 2011, at 2:59 AM, Galanov, Sergey wrote: > Hi, Bill and Jakob. > > I don't quite understand. I am talking about CMOV_GR* instructions which are conservatively marked as clobbering EFLAGS in X86InstrCompiler.td. Doesn't that mean there cannot be any use of EFLAGS in subsequent instructions before it is def...

...normal branch instructions there is no specific reset instruction and EFLAGS is not marked live-in in successor blocks. How is that different from our case? -----Original Message----- From: Jakob Stoklund Olesen [mailto:stoklund at 2pi.dk] Sent: Friday, June 03, 2011 3:53 AM To: Bill Wendling Cc: Galanov, Sergey; llvmdev at cs.uiuc.edu Subject: Re: [LLVMdev] MachineSink and EFLAGS On Jun 2, 2011, at 12:58 PM, Bill Wendling wrote: > On Jun 2, 2011, at 3:53 AM, Galanov, Sergey wrote: > >> Hi Bill. >> >> Thank you very much! Now I see my understanding was incorrect :) A de...

...ldn't it be safe then to not set the live-in flag in EmitLoweredSelect for instructions which are marked as defining EFLAGS (like the integer pseudo cmovs)? Thanks, Sergey -----Original Message----- From: Bill Wendling [mailto:wendling at apple.com] Sent: Thursday, June 02, 2011 12:00 AM To: Galanov, Sergey Cc: llvmdev at cs.uiuc.edu Subject: Re: [LLVMdev] MachineSink and EFLAGS On Jun 1, 2011, at 9:18 AM, Galanov, Sergey wrote: > Hello. > > I am not sure this is the right place to ask but here is my question. > About a year ago there was a fix of some obscure bug (rdar://prob...

...in this case, can't we? So this is precisely my proposal: don't mark EFLAGS live-in in the new blocks in EmitLoweredSelect if EFLAGS is a dead def of the pseudo cmov. -----Original Message----- From: Bill Wendling [mailto:wendling at apple.com] Sent: Saturday, June 04, 2011 2:32 AM To: Galanov, Sergey Cc: Jakob Stoklund Olesen; llvmdev at cs.uiuc.edu Subject: Re: [LLVMdev] MachineSink and EFLAGS On Jun 3, 2011, at 2:59 AM, Galanov, Sergey wrote: > Hi, Bill and Jakob. > > I don't quite understand. I am talking about CMOV_GR* instructions which are conservatively marked as...

On Jun 1, 2011, at 9:18 AM, Galanov, Sergey wrote: > Hello. > > I am not sure this is the right place to ask but here is my question. About a year ago there was a fix of some obscure bug (rdar://problem/8030636 which is located on the internal Apple bugtracker I believe and so not available to the general public J) > S...

Thanks for spelling it out, now I understand. On Jun 5, 2011, at 6:11 AM, Galanov, Sergey wrote: > Well, the point is CMOV_GR* are marked clobbering EFLAGS conservatively just in case they turn out to be lowered into a sequence containing XOR %reg,%reg which indeed clobbers EFLAGS. This means there might not be any instruction which actually uses this EFLAGS value. This act...

On Jun 2, 2011, at 3:53 AM, Galanov, Sergey wrote: > Hi Bill. > > Thank you very much! Now I see my understanding was incorrect :) A dependence from a single physreg-defining instruction (like CMP or TEST) is allowed to be shared in several instructions unless that register is not clobbered (and this is what we have with C...

Hello. I am not sure this is the right place to ask but here is my question. About a year ago there was a fix of some obscure bug (rdar://problem/8030636 which is located on the internal Apple bugtracker I believe and so not available to the general public :)) Some discussion can be found here: http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/pipermail/llvm-commits/Week-of-Mon-20100531/102160.html. Unfortunately, no

Hi Duncan. Probably it depends on exact gcc version and possibly assert/noassert build option. I've got this problem with gcc 4.5.2 on 64-bit Suse (I don't remember whether assertions were enabled). On 17 September 2012 21:12, Duncan Sands <baldrick at free.fr> wrote: > Hi Sergey, > > >> This is a known gcc bug >>

Hi. This is a known gcc bug (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53670). GCC 4.5 can't compile clang 3.1 On 13 September 2012 06:53, 陳韋任 (Wei-Ren Chen) <chenwj at iis.sinica.edu.tw> wrote: > Hi all, > > I think it's Gentoo's bug, but I want to know if anyone has the same > issue here. I am compiling LLVM trunk on Gentoo (gcc 4.5.2), and I get > error

Hi Sergey, > This is a known gcc bug > (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53670). GCC 4.5 can't > compile clang 3.1 are you sure? I built the LLVM/clang-3.1 release binaries for ubuntu 64 bits using gcc-4.5. Ciao, Duncan. > > On 13 September 2012 06:53, 陳韋任 (Wei-Ren Chen) <chenwj at iis.sinica.edu.tw> wrote: >> Hi all, >> >> I think

Hi all, I think it's Gentoo's bug, but I want to know if anyone has the same issue here. I am compiling LLVM trunk on Gentoo (gcc 4.5.2), and I get error message below, --- make[4]: Entering directory `/nfs_home/chenwj/llvm-3.1/svn/build/tools/clang/lib/Frontend' llvm[4]: Compiling InitHeaderSearch.cpp for Release+Asserts build