search for: implicitkill

Displaying 4 results from an estimated 4 matches for "implicitkill".

2009 May 13
2
[LLVMdev] RFC: Code Gen Change!
...the booleans, you pass in a flag that has bits set to indicate what state the register is in: namespace RegState { enum { Define = 0x1, Implicit = 0x2, Kill = 0x4, Dead = 0x8, EarlyClobber = 0x10, ImplicitDefine = Implicit | Define, ImplicitKill = Implicit | Kill }; } class MachineInstrBuilder { MachineInstr *MI; public: explicit MachineInstrBuilder(MachineInstr *mi) : MI(mi) {} /// addReg - Add a new virtual register operand... /// const MachineInstrBuilder &addReg(unsigned RegNo, unsigned flags = 0,...
2009 May 13
0
[LLVMdev] RFC: Code Gen Change!
...set > to indicate what state the register is in: > > namespace RegState { > enum { > Define = 0x1, > Implicit = 0x2, > Kill = 0x4, > Dead = 0x8, > EarlyClobber = 0x10, > ImplicitDefine = Implicit | Define, > ImplicitKill = Implicit | Kill > }; > } [...] > MachineInstrBuilder &addReg(unsigned RegNo, unsigned flags = 0, > unsigned SubReg = 0) const { Hi Bill, I definitely like this change. The staccato bool arguments are impossible to read. One comment: If I forge...
2012 Jan 25
0
[LLVMdev] Best way to interface with MSVC _ftol2 runtime function for fptoui?
...oint, where you can rewrite it. > > Look at the code handling INLINE_ASM. You need to do the same, except you have fixed arguments STUses=1 and STClobbers=1, ST*=0. That should greatly simplify the code you need. That makes sense; thanks for the tip. Are the getCopyToReg(ST0) and addReg(ST0, ImplicitKill) calls on the expanded MI at all necessary then since X86FloatingPoint seems to manage that all internally? > When SSE is available, x87 registers are only ever used for f80. It looks like it always tries to use fisttp when converting to i64. This bitcode: define i64 @foo(double %x) nounwind...
2012 Jan 25
2
[LLVMdev] Best way to interface with MSVC _ftol2 runtime function for fptoui?
On Jan 24, 2012, at 2:30 PM, Joe Groff wrote: > On Fri, Jan 20, 2012 at 2:10 PM, Jakob Stoklund Olesen <stoklund at 2pi.dk> wrote: >> X86FloatingPoint.cpp with comments is all you get. > > Thanks for your help, Jakob. Attached is a first-pass attempt at a > patch. I don't want to post to -commits yet because I have no idea if > this is fully correct, but it seems