Displaying 20 results from an estimated 28 matches for "inputargs".
Did you mean:
inputarg
2011 Oct 07
1
Creating One Single Object with Phenotype and Expression Data
...oes anyone have any advice on how I could make a single
object that would do this? Other relevant info: I want to use the pdata()
function, and I have all the phenotype data available as csv files. Here is
what I have in regards to the expression data:
library(affy)
library(arrayQualityMetrics)
inputargs <- commandArgs(TRUE)
print(inputargs)
sessionInfo()
strInputAccession <- inputargs[1]
strBaseDir <- inputargs[2]
processedDir <-
paste(strBaseDir,strInputAccession,"PROCESSED/DEFAULT",sep="/")
qcDir <- paste(strBaseDir,strInputAccession,"QC",sep="...
2011 Mar 24
0
[LLVMdev] mblaze backend: unreachable executed
> what does "refuses to compile" mean? I.e. what error do you get?
>
Specifically I get this message when compiling with the default -mattr:
Call result #2 has unhandled type i32
UNREACHABLE executed at CallingConvLower.cpp:162!
0 llc 0x0000000100a1e115 PrintStackTrace(void*) + 38
1 llc 0x0000000100a1e6d0 SignalHandler(int) + 254
2
2011 Mar 24
2
[LLVMdev] mblaze backend: unreachable executed
Hi Josef,
> Okay, I've done a lot more testing and I now have a .bc file that compiles for x86, sparc, mips but refuses to compile for the mblaze and powerPC backends because of the calling convention. Is there anyone that would know how to fix the microblaze calling convention or point me in the right direction on how to fix it?
what does "refuses to compile" mean? I.e. what
2012 Apr 04
3
[LLVMdev] [cfe-commits] Fix handling of ARM homogenous aggregates
On Wednesday 04 Apr 2012 12:41:49 Patrik Hägglund H wrote:
> Hi Tim,
>
> > So I've come to the conclusion that the real flaw is LLVM
> > not exposing enough information to the target-dependent
> > backend code for it to do the right thing.
>
> We also had this problem. You might find this patch useful as a starting
> point:
2011 Oct 07
0
Creating One Single Object Linking Multiple Datapoints
...uld do this? Other relevant info: I want to use the pdata()
>> function, and I have all the phenotype data available as csv files. Here
>> is
>> what I have in regards to the expression data:
>>
>> library(affy)
>> library(arrayQualityMetrics)
>>
>> inputargs<- commandArgs(TRUE)
>> print(inputargs)
>> sessionInfo()
>>
>> strInputAccession<- inputargs[1]
>> strBaseDir<- inputargs[2]
>>
>> processedDir<-
>> paste(strBaseDir,**strInputAccession,"PROCESSED/**DEFAULT",sep="/")
&g...
2011 Mar 15
3
[LLVMdev] mblaze backend: unreachable executed
Hello,
I am working on a backend for a custom ISA that is somewhat similar to the MicroBlaze ISA so I've decided to use that as a starting point. I am trying to compile a custom ray tracer (lots of floating point) and the llvm-g++ frontend generates an fneg instruction which is not supported by the MBlaze backend in the 2.8 release. I added code to emit an fneg assembly instruction and now
2011 Mar 24
0
[LLVMdev] mblaze backend: unreachable executed
>
> what does "refuses to compile" mean? I.e. what error do you get?
>
Specifically I get this message when compiling with the default -mattr:
Call result #2 has unhandled type i32
UNREACHABLE executed at CallingConvLower.cpp:162!
0 llc 0x0000000100a1e115 PrintStackTrace(void*) + 38
1 llc 0x0000000100a1e6d0 SignalHandler(int) + 254
2
2011 Mar 15
0
[LLVMdev] mblaze backend: unreachable executed
Hello,
Am 15.03.2011 um 19:27 schrieb Josef Spjut:
> Does anyone know what common causes of "UNREACHABLE executed!"
> messages are and what this message in particular means? The full
> error message is the following:
>
> UNREACHABLE executed!
> 0 llc 0x0000000100936ae2 PrintStackTrace(void*) + 34
> 1 llc 0x0000000100937603
2012 Mar 30
2
[LLVMdev] [cfe-commits] Fix handling of ARM homogenous aggregates
Hi,
(Forward from cfe-commits, where some backend stuff has come up).
This is an issue I've been thinking about quite a bit recently, and I agree that the biggest problem is the one below:
> * The big thing still missing here is that there is no logic to check how many VFP registers have already been used for other arguments. When deciding whether to pass an argument as a homogeneous
2012 Apr 04
0
[LLVMdev] [cfe-commits] Fix handling of ARM homogenous aggregates
Hi Tim,
> So I've come to the conclusion that the real flaw is LLVM
> not exposing enough information to the target-dependent
> backend code for it to do the right thing.
We also had this problem. You might find this patch useful as a starting point:
http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/pipermail/llvmdev/2012-March/048266.html
/Patrik Hägglund
-----Original Message-----
From: llvmdev-bounces
2011 Jan 21
1
[LLVMdev] why dummy asserting base/interface class virtual methods instead of pure virtual methods?
LLVM code base seems to be full of base/interface classes, which have
methods like
virtual SDValue
LowerCall(SDValue Chain, SDValue Callee,
CallingConv::ID CallConv, bool isVarArg, bool &isTailCall,
const SmallVectorImpl<ISD::OutputArg> &Outs,
const SmallVectorImpl<SDValue> &OutVals,
const
2012 Apr 05
0
[LLVMdev] [cfe-commits] [Patch?] Fix handling of ARM homogenous aggregates
On Wednesday 04 Apr 2012 13:27:07 Tim Northover wrote:
> Putting that information in the InputArg/OutputArg and incorporating it the
> CCAssignFn interface allows a more straightforward implementation in the
> targets, in my view (for both our uses). It's also information that's
> readily available when InputArg/OutputArgs are being constructed. In your
> case:
>
>
2009 Apr 25
0
[LLVMdev] Calling-convention lowering proposal
On Apr 23, 2009, at 8:09 PM, Dan Gohman wrote:
> Attached is a patch which significantly reworks how calls, incoming
> arguments, and outgoing return values are lowered. It's a major
> change,
> affecting all targets, so I'm looking for feedback on the approach.
>
> The goal of the patch is to eliminate a bunch of awkward code,
> eliminate some unnecessary
2013 Aug 08
2
[LLVMdev] Storage-Only Register Class?
On Thu, Aug 8, 2013 at 3:59 PM, Tom Stellard <tom at stellard.net> wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 08, 2013 at 01:51:53PM -0400, Justin Holewinski wrote:
> > Good to know, thanks!
> >
> > Currently I'm just not declaring an i8 register class since we only have
> > load/store/convert available for that type. This works fine for most
> uses,
> > but becomes a
2013 Aug 27
0
[LLVMdev] Storage-Only Register Class?
On Thu, Aug 08, 2013 at 04:25:25PM -0400, Justin Holewinski wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 8, 2013 at 3:59 PM, Tom Stellard <tom at stellard.net> wrote:
>
> > On Thu, Aug 08, 2013 at 01:51:53PM -0400, Justin Holewinski wrote:
> > > Good to know, thanks!
> > >
> > > Currently I'm just not declaring an i8 register class since we only have
> > >
2013 Aug 29
1
[LLVMdev] Storage-Only Register Class?
It's been on the back-burner for awhile. I'll clean it up and post it for
review soon.
On Tue, Aug 27, 2013 at 7:48 PM, Tom Stellard <tom at stellard.net> wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 08, 2013 at 04:25:25PM -0400, Justin Holewinski wrote:
> > On Thu, Aug 8, 2013 at 3:59 PM, Tom Stellard <tom at stellard.net> wrote:
> >
> > > On Thu, Aug 08, 2013 at
2011 Apr 02
0
[LLVMdev] Callee prototype info in LowerCall()
Hello, I'm having trouble getting the function prototype of an
ExternalSymbolSDNode inside TargetLowering::LowerCall(), this way i could
get the original argument sizes before they're legalized into smaller parts.
I need this sort of information because depending on the originaltypes of
the arguments i need to use some regs or others. I tried using the isSplit
flag in ArgFlagsTy but it
2012 May 25
0
[LLVMdev] Changes to TargetLowering::{LowerCallTo,LowerCall}
A change has just been committed that changes the interface for TargetLowering::LowerCallTo and TargetLowering::LowerCall. Instead of passing a mess of parameters to these functions, a new structure has been created that encapsulates these parameters. The motivation is that additional fields can be added to this structure (with appropriate changes to SelectionDAGBuilder for populating the new
2012 Sep 21
2
[LLVMdev] Error: llc crashes (LLVM 3.1)
On Fri, Sep 21, 2012 at 5:38 PM, Duncan Sands <baldrick at free.fr> wrote:
> Hi Jun, I can reproduce this with "llc -mtriple=i386-linux-gnu", the crash
> being
>
> Call result #3 has unhandled type i32
> UNREACHABLE executed at
> /home/duncan/LLVM/llvm/lib/CodeGen/CallingConvLower.cpp:165!
> ...
>
2012 Nov 27
0
[LLVMdev] Problem selecting the correct registers for a calling convention
Hi Job,
> This issue is basically that I cannot find a way to distinguish two i16
> arguments from one i32. Is there a way to do this in LLVM? Preferably using
> tablegen, of course:-)
I think the property you want is "isSplit" (or, from the TableGen side
CCIfSplit).
This gets applied to the first of those i16s that are produced.
Unfortunately I can't think of much you