search for: iscompare

I see strangeness on Thumb TST (tTST) predicate 'isCompare' It is true for regular ARM, false for Thumb: (gdb) p MI->dump() TSTri %reg16397, 3, pred:14, pred:%reg0, %CPSR<imp-def>; GPR:% reg16397 $24 = void (gdb) p MI->getDesc().isCompare() $25 = true (gdb) p MI->dump() tTST %reg16396, %reg16397, pred:14, pred:%reg0, %CPSR<...

On Sep 14, 2010, at 12:09 PM, Gabor Greif wrote: > I see strangeness on Thumb TST (tTST) predicate 'isCompare' > > It is true for regular ARM, false for Thumb: > > (gdb) p MI->dump() > TSTri %reg16397, 3, pred:14, pred:%reg0, %CPSR<imp-def>; GPR:% > reg16397 > $24 = void > (gdb) p MI->getDesc().isCompare() > $25 = true > > > (gdb) p MI->dump() &...

...n __TEXT,__text,regular,pure_instructions testl $570425344, %eax ## imm = 0x22000000 however, i cannot find anywhere this F7 opcode is defined in lib/Target/X86/X86InstrArithmetic.td. we only have TEST defined with F6 & other opcode like below. any hint please? thanks. let isCompare = 1 in { let Defs = [EFLAGS] in { let isCommutable = 1 in { def TEST8rr : BinOpRR_F<0x84, "test", Xi8 , X86testpat, MRMSrcReg>; def TEST16rr : BinOpRR_F<0x84, "test", Xi16, X86testpat, MRMSrcReg>; def TEST32rr : BinOpRR_F<0x84, "test&...

...gorizing TST wrongly > To: LLVM Developers Mailing List <llvmdev at cs.uiuc.edu> > Message-ID: <7EABAC00-FD22-4757-8F8B-9FFEF5AD5767 at mac.com> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; delsp=yes; format=flowed > > I see strangeness on Thumb TST (tTST) predicate 'isCompare' > > It is true for regular ARM, false for Thumb: > > (gdb) p MI->dump() > TSTri %reg16397, 3, pred:14, pred:%reg0, %CPSR<imp-def>; GPR:% > reg16397 > $24 = void > (gdb) p MI->getDesc().isCompare() > $25 = true > > > (gdb) p MI->dump() >...

Hi, I find it's quite strange how condition dependent instructions are processed in PeepholeOptimizer::runOnMachineFunction: 01577 if ((isUncoalescableCopy(*MI) && 01578 optimizeUncoalescableCopy(MI, LocalMIs)) || 01579 (MI->isCompare() && optimizeCmpInstr(MI, &MBB)) || 01580 (MI->isSelect() && optimizeSelect(MI, LocalMIs))) { 01581 // MI is deleted. 01582 LocalMIs.erase(MI); 01583 Changed = true; 01584 continue; 01585 } 01586 01587 if (MI->isConditi...

...nfo.td, in the following section of "BinOp8RF", which is used by the "defm" line that generates the "add" instruction pattern: multiclass BinOp8RF<Prefix prefix, bits<3> opcode, string mnemonic, bit compare = 0> { let isCompare = compare, Defs = [A, F], Uses = [A] in { def 8ap : I8 <prefix, {0b10, opcode, 0b110}, mnemonic, "\ta, $src", "", (outs), (ins ptr:$src), [(set A, F, (Z80add_flag...

...lists.llvm.org>> wrote: Hi, I find it's quite strange how condition dependent instructions are processed in PeepholeOptimizer::runOnMachineFunction: 01577 if ((isUncoalescableCopy(*MI) && 01578 optimizeUncoalescableCopy(MI, LocalMIs)) || 01579 (MI->isCompare() && optimizeCmpInstr(MI, &MBB)) || 01580 (MI->isSelect() && optimizeSelect(MI, LocalMIs))) { 01581 // MI is deleted. 01582 LocalMIs.erase(MI); 01583 Changed = true; 01584 continue; 01585 } 01586 01587 if (MI->isConditi...

Thanks Duncan, Yes, it is a ConstantExpr! Thank you! Now trying to find a clue in ConstantExpr's functions to get that string :-) Regards, Welson On Thu, Jan 26, 2012 at 9:04 PM, Duncan Sands <baldrick at free.fr> wrote: > Hi Welson Sun, > > > Hi, if I have some LLVM code like this: > > > > @.str = private unnamed_addr constant [7 x i8]

...// The implemented patterns are: EQ/GT/GTU. >> // Missing patterns are: GE/GEU/LT/LTU/LE/LEU. >> >> +// Following instruction is not being extended as it results into the >> +// incorrect code for negative numbers. >> // Pd=cmpb.eq(Rs,#u8) >> + >> let isCompare = 1 in >> def CMPbEQri_V4 : MInst<(outs PredRegs:$dst), >> (ins IntRegs:$src1, u8Imm:$src2), >> "$dst = cmpb.eq($src1, #$src2)", >> - [(set PredRegs:$dst, (seteq (and IntRegs:$src1, 255), >> -...

Hi, There: I'd like to add bit, called "addr_not_taken", to GlobalVariable in order to indicate if a GlobalVariable doesn't has its address taken or not. 1.The motivation =============== The motivation can be explained by the following example. In this example, variable x does not have its address taken, therefore, it cannot be indirectly access. So, we can prove

Hi Sanjay, Thanks, I saw this flag and it's definitely should be considered, but it appeared to me to be static characteristic of target platform. I'm not sure how appropriate it would be to change its value from a front-end. It says "Has", while optional flag would rather say "Uses" meaning that implementation cares about floating point exceptions. Regards, Sergey

...NewC = ConstantFoldConstantExpressionImpl(NewCE, TD, TLI, FoldedOps, + HonorFPExceptions); } Ops.push_back(NewC); } @@ -984,7 +989,8 @@ ConstantFoldConstantExpressionImpl(const ConstantExpr *CE, const DataLayout *TD, if (CE->isCompare()) return ConstantFoldCompareInstOperands(CE->getPredicate(), Ops[0], Ops[1], TD, TLI); - return ConstantFoldInstOperands(CE->getOpcode(), CE->getType(), Ops, TD, TLI); + return ConstantFoldInstOperands(CE->getOpcode(), CE->getType()...