search for: hexagonal

Sure I will split it and put it in two patches. Give me few hours. I need to test those patches. Sirish On 4/19/2012 8:40 AM, Tom Stellard wrote: > On Wed, Apr 18, 2012 at 11:18:05PM -0500, Sirish Pande wrote: >> Hi, >> >> Here's a patch for Hexagon Packetizer for review. This patch does >> not yield any warnings. >> > Would it be possible to split this

I wanted to give everybody a heads-up on upcoming commits for the Hexagon backend. We will be removing support for older versions of the Hexagon architecture - specifically Hexagon-v2 and Hexagon-v3. These are no longer being used by compiler users. Matthew Curtis has committed the first clang patch to remove driver support for these versions. There will be follow-up patches on the LLVM side

On 03/14/2013 12:51 PM, Anshuman Dasgupta wrote: > I wanted to give everybody a heads-up on upcoming commits for the > Hexagon backend. We will be removing support for older versions of the > Hexagon architecture - specifically Hexagon-v2 and Hexagon-v3. These are > no longer being used by compiler users. Matthew Curtis has committed the > first clang patch to remove driver support

Hello, I run into a problem that llvm can't write the correct ELFHeaderEFlags for hexagonv4. The following patch can fix it. Index: lib/Target/Hexagon/MCTargetDesc/HexagonMCTargetDesc.cpp =================================================================== --- lib/Target/Hexagon/MCTargetDesc/HexagonMCTargetDesc.cpp (revision 265917) +++

Hello all, I’m planning to transition the code ownership of the Hexagon backend to Krzysztof Parzyszek. Krzysztof has done an excellent job of updating the Hexagon backend and engaging in community discussions (on the Hexagon backend and on other topics). He has a number of improvements planned for the Hexagon compiler and is an obvious choice for owning the Hexagon target. If there are no

I tried to land a small fix before going on vacation at the end of the year, but I had to revert it because it broke on a few of the build bots, specifically clang-cmake-thumbv7-a15, clang-cmake-armv7-a15, and llvm-hexagon-elf. https://reviews.llvm.org/D41264 It seemed to work as expected on the others. Unfortunately, the build logs don't give many clues. The fix included a new test, and

On 7/3/2012 5:01 AM, Duncan Sands wrote: > Hi, > >> (4) llc -march=hexagon test.ll -o test.s >> >> '' is not a recognized processor for this target (ignoring processor) >> 0 llc 0x08c2512b >> Stack dump: >> 0. Program arguments: llc -march=hexagon test.ll -o test.s >> 1. Running pass 'Function Pass Manager' on module

On Tue, Jul 3, 2012 at 9:27 PM, Sebastian Pop <spop at codeaurora.org> wrote: > Hi, > > On Tue, Jul 3, 2012 at 9:48 AM, Tony Linthicum <tlinth at codeaurora.org> wrote: >> On 7/3/2012 5:01 AM, Duncan Sands wrote: >>> Hi, >>> >>>> (4) llc -march=hexagon test.ll -o test.s >>>> >>>> '' is not a recognized

hi, does someone notice that llc options "-march=hexagon" and "-march-sparcv9" do not work well under llvm 3.1? Following is a brief description: (1) test.c file int cmp(int i, int j) { return (i>j)?1:0; } (2) test.ll file (clang -emit-llvm test.c -S -o test.ll) ; ModuleID = 'test.c' target datalayout =

On 1/4/2018 4:51 PM, Adrian McCarthy via llvm-dev wrote: > I tried to land a small fix before going on vacation at the end of the > year, but I had to revert it because it broke on a few of the build > bots, specifically clang-cmake-thumbv7-a15, clang-cmake-armv7-a15, and > llvm-hexagon-elf. > > https://reviews.llvm.org/D41264 I think you meant to put the test into

Hi, On Tue, Jul 3, 2012 at 9:48 AM, Tony Linthicum <tlinth at codeaurora.org> wrote: > On 7/3/2012 5:01 AM, Duncan Sands wrote: >> Hi, >> >>> (4) llc -march=hexagon test.ll -o test.s >>> >>> '' is not a recognized processor for this target (ignoring processor) >>> 0 llc 0x08c2512b >>> Stack dump: >>> 0. Program

> On Hexagon, the slot assignment is determined by the layout of the > instructions in memory. The order of the instructions in the packet does > not matter either in the IR, nor in the .s file, but it does when the > packet is encoded into the actual machine code. In LLVM, the Hexagon > shuffler orders the instructions just prior to encoding. > > Specifically, the

Hi paulr, Thank you for your response :) Hi Krzysztof, This is really helpful! Thank you for your guidance!! I would like to trace the Hexagon's llvm implementation. I am very interested on how Hexagon implement instruction pattern matching, instruction scheduling, and register allocation, could you give me some suggestions or reading lists to help me understand Hexagon's llvm

C:\Program Files (x86)\Microsoft Visual Studio 11.0\VC\include\concrt.h(313): warning C4530: C++ exception handler used, but unwind semantics are not enabled. Specify /EHsc (C:\lld-x86_64_win7\lld-x86_64-win7\llvm.src\tools\lld\lib\ReaderWriter\ELF\Hexagon\HexagonLinkingContext.cpp) [C:\lld-x86_64_win7\lld-x86_64-win7\llvm.obj\tools\lld\lib\ReaderWriter\ELF\Hexagon\lldHexagonELFTarget.vcxproj]

Hi Sebastian, On 19/07/12 05:57, Sebastian Pop wrote: > On Tue, Jul 3, 2012 at 9:27 PM, Sebastian Pop <spop at codeaurora.org> wrote: >> Hi, >> >> On Tue, Jul 3, 2012 at 9:48 AM, Tony Linthicum <tlinth at codeaurora.org> wrote: >>> On 7/3/2012 5:01 AM, Duncan Sands wrote: >>>> Hi, >>>> >>>>> (4) llc -march=hexagon

Thanks! It looks like this is sorted out now. On Thu, Jan 4, 2018 at 5:07 PM, Friedman, Eli <efriedma at codeaurora.org> wrote: > On 1/4/2018 4:51 PM, Adrian McCarthy via llvm-dev wrote: > > I tried to land a small fix before going on vacation at the end of the > year, but I had to revert it because it broke on a few of the build bots, > specifically

DFAPacketizer has a virtual method isLegalToPruneDependencies(). I looked at the Hexagon code and but wasn't unable to understand the details (unfortunately as of now, I'm not well versed in the Hexagon architecture). Would anyone be able to shed light on what is dependency pruning and how it should be used? Any help is appreciated. -- R -------------- next part -------------- An HTML

Hi, > (4) llc -march=hexagon test.ll -o test.s > > '' is not a recognized processor for this target (ignoring processor) > 0 llc 0x08c2512b > Stack dump: > 0. Program arguments: llc -march=hexagon test.ll -o test.s > 1. Running pass 'Function Pass Manager' on module 'test.ll'. > 2. Running pass 'Hexagon DAG->DAG Pattern Instruction

It looks like my Metadata/Value split broke the hexagon bot [1], but I can't figure out why. Is there anyone that can help me diagnose the problem? [1]: http://lab.llvm.org:8011/builders/llvm-hexagon-elf/builds/13434 All the tests are crashing in the same way; looks like a double-free? (In the meantime, I'll keep trying to find the problem by inspection...)

Since Jakob had expressed some concerns regarding machine-generated files, I asked him by email about his views on this RFC. Here are the emails that we exchanged in attach. Anyone feel free to jump in via the mailing-list. TIA -- Evandro Menezes Austin, TX emenezes at codeaurora.org Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc is a member of the Code Aurora Forum -------------- next