search for: intrreadargmem

...ix diassembler > handling of rex.b when mod=00/01/10 and bbb=101. Mod=00 should ignore the > base register entirely. Mod=01/10 should treat this as R13 plus > displacment. Fixes PR18860 > 6. r201126 - Robert Khasanov - Changed attributes of all gather intrinsics > from IntrReadMem to IntrReadArgMem as they access only memory based on > argument. > > Most patches fix different stable issues on X86 target. > > Thanks, > Robert > > > > 2014-03-26 20:10 GMT+04:00 Tom Stellard <tom at stellard.net>: > > > Hi, > > > > We are now about h...

...gling from these intrinsics: %res = call <16 x i32> @llvm.masked.load (i32* %addr, <16 x i32>%passthru, i32 4, <16 x i1> %mask) def int_masked_load : Intrinsic<[llvm_anyvector_ty], [llvm_anyptr_ty, llvm_anyvector_ty, llvm_anyint_ty, llvm_anyvector_ty], [IntrReadArgMem, NoNameMangling]>; // new property It will significantly simplify reading and manual writing. What do you think? Thank you. - Elena --------------------------------------------------------------------- Intel Israel (74) Limited This e-mail and any attachments may contain confidenti...

...using different memory banks. I have written the frontend to generate a valid IR and want to use the existing passes (as defined in tool opt) to optimize the code. The target has specific instructions, so following advices given in documentation, I created an intrinsic function, with attribute [IntrReadArgMem]. My test case is very simple : I repeat twice a set of instructions and would like that the optimizer delete the second one; the set is { INSTR 1 : store of data in bank 1; INSTR 2 : call of intrinsic (read only) INSTR 3 : store of data in bank 2; } When calling the intrinsic funct...

...<16 x i32> @llvm.masked.load (i32* %addr, <16 x >>> i32>%passthru, i32 4, <16 x i1> %mask) >>> >>> def int_masked_load : >>> Intrinsic<[llvm_anyvector_ty], [llvm_anyptr_ty, llvm_anyvector_ty, >>> llvm_anyint_ty, llvm_anyvector_ty], [IntrReadArgMem, >>> NoNameMangling]>; >>> // new property >>> >>> It will significantly simplify reading and manual writing. >>> What do you think? >> >> We already have this kind of situation for @llvm.memcpy and friends, >> and while it can mak...

Thanks Eli. I will try your solution, but then, what is the difference between [IntrReadArgMem] and [IntrReadMem] when specifying an intrinsic ? It seems that both options specify that a function is 'readonly' (maybe the difference is not well supported for then moment ?) Julien > Dead store elimination is that pass that could do the optimizations in > question. The second...

Hi, If I define a intrinsic function with pointer-typed parameter, for example, def llvm_foo_ptr_ty : LLVMPointerType<llvm_i16_ty>; def int_foo_get : Intrinsic<[llvm_foo_ptr_ty], [llvm_foo_ptr_ty, llvm_i32_ty], [IntrReadArgMem]>; How to lower it for the backend? I'm not sure what kind of register (i16 or i32 or i32) is needed in this case? If the parameter is LLVMPointerType<llvm_i32_ty> instead of LLVMPointerType<llvm_i16_ty>, will this make difference for the backend? Suppose my backend has three ty...

...ks. > I have written the frontend to generate a valid IR and want to use the > existing passes (as defined in tool opt) to optimize the code. > > The target has specific instructions, so following advices given in > documentation, I created an intrinsic function, with attribute > [IntrReadArgMem]. > > My test case is very simple : I repeat twice a set of instructions and > would like that the optimizer delete the second one; > the set is > { INSTR 1 : store of data in bank 1; > INSTR 2 : call of intrinsic (read only) > INSTR 3 : store of data in bank 2; } &g...

Hi, All, I want to add one intrinsic function for my particular backend. Let's say the intrinsic function is named "foo" which takes two i32 inputs and has one i32 output. First, I add this line "def int_foo : Intrinsic<[llvm_i32_ty], [llvm_i32_ty, llvm_i32_ty], [IntrReadArgMem]>;" in /include/llvm/IR/Intrinsics.td. Then, in my target/InstrInfo.td, I'm supposed to add one pattern to match this intrinsic function. However, I don't understand how LLVM can tell the difference between this intrinsic function call and other normal function calls. From the IR,...

...rom these intrinsics: > %res = call <16 x i32> @llvm.masked.load (i32* %addr, <16 x > i32>%passthru, i32 4, <16 x i1> %mask) > > def int_masked_load : > Intrinsic<[llvm_anyvector_ty], [llvm_anyptr_ty, llvm_anyvector_ty, > llvm_anyint_ty, llvm_anyvector_ty], [IntrReadArgMem, NoNameMangling]>; > // new property > > It will significantly simplify reading and manual writing. > What do you think? We already have this kind of situation for @llvm.memcpy and friends, and while it can make the IR look verbose at times, we have reasonable interfaces for creat...

...> instead (at least for the X86 backend). Then, there's many ways to handle > pseudo-instructions inside a backend. > > I will take the X86 backend as an example. > > First, your intrinsics: > > def int_foo : Intrinsic<[llvm_i32_ty], [llvm_i32_ty, llvm_i32_ty], > [IntrReadArgMem]>; > > It will be converted into DAG nodes. Then, you can handle it manually > inside the code or using TableGen mechanism. For the latter, you should > define a pseudo-instruction that match your > intrinsic-translated-into-dag-node. The pseudo-instruction definition > should...

...01/10 and bbb=101. Mod=00 should ignore the > > > base register entirely. Mod=01/10 should treat this as R13 plus > > > displacment. Fixes PR18860 > > > 6. r201126 - Robert Khasanov - Changed attributes of all gather > > intrinsics > > > from IntrReadMem to IntrReadArgMem as they access only memory based on > > > argument. > > > > > > Most patches fix different stable issues on X86 target. > > > > > > Thanks, > > > Robert > > > > > > > > > > > > 2014-03-26 20:10 GMT+04:00 Tom S...

...as argument and transforms the pointer into another one and returns it. It does not read or write memory. The Intrinsic has properties: IntrNoMem. Is there any other property I can specify for the intrinsic function such as idempotent? Looking into the code, these are the properties: IntrNoMem, IntrReadArgMem, IntrReadMem, IntrReadWriteArgMem, Commutative and NoCapture. Only IntrNoMem applies to the intrinsic function. Also, what optimizations might be affected by an intrinsic function that only transforms a pointer? Is there a way to pass more information so that LLVM can do even more optimizations...

Hi, We are now about halfway between the 3.4 and 3.5 releases, and I would like to start preparing for a 3.4.1 release. Here is my proposed release schedule: Mar 26 - April 9: Identify and backport additional bug fixes to the 3.4 branch. April 9 - April 18: Testing Phase April 18: 3.4.1 Release How you can help: - If you have any bug fixes you think should be included to 3.4.1, send me an