search for: ldr

In an earlier email[1] I proposed adding support for the ldr pseud-instruction to the ARM integrated assembler. After some discussion the overall consensus seemed to be that it was worth adding. One concern was that we needed to have adequate testing. I promised to provide more details on what the behavior should be and provide some tests before starting the...

...ing factor is meant to be held in floating point register d8. I thought at first it might not be initialized at all, but upon closer examination I think it may actually be initialized from a program counter-relative 32-bit .long constant immediately following my method's code. .loc 1 388 3 ldr r0, [r5] ldr r1, [r4, r0] adds r1, #1 str r1, [r4, r0] .loc 1 390 64 mov r0, r4 ldr r1, [r6] blx _objc_msgSend vmov s0, r0 vmul.f32 d0, d0, d8 vcvt.u32.f32 d0, d0 vmov r0, s0 Ltmp272: .loc 1 392 9 cmp.w r0, #4000 Ltmp273: .loc 1 393 13 it hs blxhs _usleep cmp.w *looks* like a 16-bi...

I have attached an initial patch that implements the ldr pseudo. It still needs some clean up and more tests, but I would like some feedback on the approach I used and if there are any objections to implementing it this way. Here is my approach: Add a finishParse() callback to the target asm parser This callback is invoked when the parse has finished...

..., #CTXT_FRAME_SIZE +SPFIX( tst sp, #4 ) +SPFIX( bicne sp, sp, #4 ) + stmib sp, {r1 - lr}^ + ldmia r0, {r1 - r4} + add r5, sp, #CTXT_SSP + add r0, sp, #CTXT_FRAME_SIZE +SPFIX( addne r0, r0, #4 ) + str r1, [sp] + mov r1, lr + stmia r5, {r0 - r4} + msr spsr_cxsf, r3 +.endm + +.macro RESTORE_CONTEXT + ldr r0, [sp, #CTXT_SPSR] + msr spsr_cxsf, r0 + ldmia sp, {r0 - lr}^ + add sp, sp, #CTXT_SSP + ldmia sp, {sp, lr, pc}^ +.endm + + .align 5 + .global exception_vector_table +exception_vector_table: + ldr pc, .rst + ldr pc, .und + ldr pc, .swi + ldr pc, .pabt + ldr pc, .dabt + ldr pc, .adx + ldr pc, .irq...

Hi David, In these examples, I don’t see the directive that indicates where the assembler should place the constant pool? -Jim On Nov 1, 2013, at 11:16 AM, David Peixotto <dpeixott at codeaurora.org> wrote: > In an earlier email[1] I proposed adding support for the ldr > pseud-instruction to the ARM integrated assembler. After some discussion the > overall consensus seemed to be that it was worth adding. One concern was > that we needed to have adequate testing. I promised to provide more details > on what the behavior should be and provide some tests...

...08: 0x9b07468, LLVM BB @0x9ae9010, ID#8: Live Ins: %r4 %r5 %r7 Predecessors according to CFG: 0x9b08398 (#71) STR %r4<kill>, %sp, %NOREG, 0, 14, %NOREG %r4 = MOVi 0, 14, %NOREG, %NOREG %r0 = MOVr %r7<kill>, 14, %NOREG, %NOREG %r1 = MOVr %r5<kill>, 14, %NOREG, %NOREG %r2 = LDR <fi#1>, %NOREG, 0, 14, %NOREG %r3 = MOVr %r4, 14, %NOREG, %NOREG BL <ga:gimplify_cond_expr>, %r0<kill>, %r1<kill>, %r2<kill>, %r3<kill>, %r0<imp-def>, %r1<imp-def,dead>, %r2<imp-def,dead>, %r3<imp-def,dead>, %r12<imp-def,dead>, %...

On Fri, Oct 25, 2013 at 1:33 PM, David Peixotto <dpeixott at codeaurora.org>wrote: > Both armasm and gnu as support an ldr pseudo instruction for loading > constants that lowers to either a mov, movn, or a pc-relative ldr from the > constant pool. It would be great if the llvm integrated assembler could > support this feature as well. > > For example, using gnu as to compile this code: > .text &gt...

...) { return memcmp(g, c, 16); } $ clang --target=aarch64-linux-gnu -Os -mstrict-align -S test.c $ cat test.s .text .file "test.c" .globl f // -- Begin function f .p2align 2 .type f, at function f: // @f // %bb.0: adrp x8, g ldr x10, [x8, :lo12:g] ldr x9, [x0] ldr x8, [x10] rev x9, x9 rev x8, x8 cmp x8, x9 b.ne .LBB0_3 // %bb.1: ldr x8, [x10, #8] ldr x9, [x0, #8] rev x8, x8 rev x9, x9 cmp x8, x9 b.ne .LBB0_3 // %bb.2: mov w0, wzr ret .LBB0_3: cmp x8, x9 mov w8, #-1 cneg w0, w8, hs ret .Lfunc_end0: .size...

Both armasm and gnu as support an ldr pseudo instruction for loading constants that lowers to either a mov, movn, or a pc-relative ldr from the constant pool. It would be great if the llvm integrated assembler could support this feature as well. For example, using gnu as to compile this code: .text foo: ldr r0, =0x1...

Hi all. I'm investigating an issue with incorrect lldb's disassembly output. I have two bytes in question: 4e5f lldb (via the llvm's LLVMARMCodeGen) is providing the following mnemonics: ldr r6, #380, However the value for ldr is "an 8-bit value that is multiplied by 4 and added to the value of the PC to form the memory address" (via ARMARM), so that the correct mnemonics is: ldr r6, [pc, #380] (provided by Apple's otool). I've traced the issue down to ARMI...

I have two questions regarding MachineMemOperands and dependence information. Q1) I noticed that MachineMemOperands are lost when two LDRs are combined and a LDRD is generated in ARMPreAllocLoadStoreOpt:::RescheduleOps. (before optimization) %reg1033<def> = LDR %reg1030, %reg0, 4100, pred:14, pred:%reg0; mem:LD4[%uglygep10] %reg1054<def> = LDR %reg1030, %reg0, 4104, pred:14, pred:%reg0; mem:LD4[%uglygep2021] (after opti...

.../tmp/ccYAgFFY.s:36: Error: junk at end of line, first unrecognized character is `@' /tmp/ccYAgFFY.s:37: Error: junk at end of line, first unrecognized character is `@' /tmp/ccYAgFFY.s:38: Error: no such instruction: `stmfd sp!,{r4,r5,lr}' /tmp/ccYAgFFY.s:39: Error: no such instruction: `ldr r5,.L14' /tmp/ccYAgFFY.s:40: Error: no such instruction: `ldrb r3,[r5,' /tmp/ccYAgFFY.s:41: Error: expecting operand after ','; got nothing /tmp/ccYAgFFY.s:42: Error: no such instruction: `ldmnefd sp!,{r4,r5,pc}' /tmp/ccYAgFFY.s:43: Error: no such instruction: `ldr r4,.L14+4'...

Hi, llvm emits code for "memcpy" on ARM as consecutive ldr/str commands, and further combines them into ldm/stm with special pass after register allocation. But ldm/stm commands require registers to go in ascending order, what is often not so after regalloc, therefore some str/ldr commands. For example such code: struct Foo {int a, b, c, d; } void Cop...

...idn't want multiple pages). Just before I sent this post, I was able to generate the desired output with split.screen. Is this the expected behavior of mfrow and layout? Paul -------------------------------- My code is as follows (ToruosityPlot and DiameterPlot are essentially identical to LDRPlot). layout(matrix(1:3, ncol=1)) #par(mfrow=c(3,1)) pdf("results.pdf", width=4, height=3, pointsize=4, colormodel="cmyk", onefile=TRUE) TortuosityPlot(left, right) DiameterPlot(left, right) LDRPlot(left, right) dev.off() LDRPlot <- function(left, right) { plot(lef...

Hi Amara, Thanks for your suggestions. I have made the changes you suggested and added a new test to check that we print an error when parsing a non-ldr mnemonic with an operand containing `=`. The updated patch is attached. -- Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. is a member of Code Aurora Forum, hosted by The Linux Foundation > -----Original Message----- > From: Amara Emerson [mailto:amara.emerson at arm.com] > Sent: Tuesday, November 12...

...) {return Entries[Num];} These can be const. + int64_t ConstantPoolCounter; This can be unsigned. + case AsmToken::Equal: { + const MCSection *Section = getParser().getStreamer().getCurrentSection().first; + assert(Section); We should probably check here that the mnemonic is actually 'ldr', e.g. see the AsmToken::Identifier case. +@ RUN: clang -target arm -integrated-as -c %s -o %t1 2> %t2; echo "ok" +@ RUN: cat %t2 | FileCheck %s Clang tests shouldn't be in the LLVM regression suite. Use llvm-mc instead for assembling. I'm not very familiar with the code...

Hello all, I am looking at the assembly code of a loop body which is created by applying O3 optimization. Here it is: .LBB4_19: @ %for.body.91 @ =>This Inner Loop Header: Depth=1 ldr r0, [r5] mov r1, r8 add r0, r0, r7 vldr s0, [r0] mov r0, r6 vcvt.f64.f32 d0, s0 vmov r2, r3, d0 bl fprintf cmp r0, #0 blt .LBB4_25 @ BB#20: @ %for.cond.89 @...

On Sep 7, 2010, at 10:48 AM, Akira Hatanaka wrote: > I have two questions regarding MachineMemOperands and dependence information. > > Q1) I noticed that MachineMemOperands are lost when two LDRs are combined and a LDRD is generated in ARMPreAllocLoadStoreOpt:::RescheduleOps. > > (before optimization) > %reg1033<def> = LDR %reg1030, %reg0, 4100, pred:14, pred:%reg0; mem:LD4[%uglygep10] > %reg1054<def> = LDR %reg1030, %reg0, 4104, pred:14, pred:%reg0; mem:LD4[%uglyg...

Hi, all. Another problem in ARM assembly: I use LDR to load an external symbol : LDR R7,=DataTable But clang gives error: unexpected token in operand to the '=', Then I change the code to: LDR R7,=DataTable The error becomes: unsupported relocation on symbol. How can I get around this in clang? Thanks in advance! On Mon...

Ryan Taylor via llvm-dev <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> writes: > r0 gets overwritten inside the loop (assuming dst, src, src), is ldr > r0, [r5] needed to initialize r0 for the loop at each iteration? Register allocation should handle that if the load is hoisted. I'm with the others. The printf is the most likely culprit. -0David > On Thu, Mar 28, 2019 at 10:17 AM Fami H via llvm-dev <llvm-...