search for: llvm_i1_ty

...icsPowerPC.td, such as: > // Intrinsics used to generate ctr-based loops. These should only be > // generated by the PowerPC backend! > def int_ppc_mtctr : Intrinsic<[], [llvm_anyint_ty], []>; > def int_ppc_is_decremented_ctr_nonzero : Intrinsic<[llvm_i1_ty], [], []>; > > And these intrinsics are instantiated in the LLVM program, for example with the > following code in PPCCTRLoops.cpp: > IRBuilder<> CountBuilder(Preheader->getTerminator()); > Module *M = Preheader->getParent()->getParent(); >...

Masked load/store are overloaded intrinsics, the only generic type is the type of the value being loaded/stored. The signature of the intrinsic is generated based on this type. The type of the pointer argument is generated as a pointer to the return type with default addrspace. E.g.: declare <8 x i32> @llvm.masked.load.v8i32(<8 x i32>*, i32, <8 x i1>, <8 x i32>) The

...all, I'm playing with intrinsics and I was wondering how to lower an intrinsic that should return, for example, an int1? More precisely, how to return the value when working with MachineInst? First, I have defined an instrinsic in "Intrinsics.td": _def int_antivm : Intrinsic<[llvm_i1_ty], [], [], "llvm.antivm">;_ Then I want to lower it in the X86 backend, so I defined a pseudo instruction in "X86InstrCompiler.td": _let usesCustomInserter = 1, Defs = [EFLAGS] in {_ _def ANTIVM : PseudoI<(outs), (ins), [(int_antivm)]>;_ _}_ I wrote my custom inser...

Hi Alex, You might find it useful to look at how lib/Target/PowerPC/PPCCTRLoops.cpp works. -Hal ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Alex Susu via llvm-dev" <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> > To: "llvm-dev" <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> > Sent: Monday, May 30, 2016 5:09:37 PM > Subject: [llvm-dev] Back end with special loop instructions > > Hello.

I have defined the intrinsic as * def int_loop: Intrinsic<[],[llvm_i8_ty, llvm_empty_ty],[]>;* and also got the Codegen backend support in Instructioninfo.td file. Then created a .ll file to test it. The .ll file is like this *declare void @llvm.loop(i8, label)define void @fn() nounwind readnone {entry: ..... ..... call void @llvm.loop(i8 10, label %entry) ret void}* But

Hello. I'm writing a back end for my research SIMD processor that has an assembly language that is blocked structured, with one-level loops. An example program with my assembly language: REPEAT_X_TIMES(Param2) R0 = LS[offset_A]; END_REPEAT; The LLVM code somewhat equivalent to the above ASM program is: vector.body: %index = phi i64 [

On Mon, 14 Apr 2008, Edward Lee wrote: > On Mon, Apr 14, 2008 at 6:00 PM, Chris Lattner <sabre at nondot.org> wrote: >> You can change the code generator or not run the block layout pass. > Ok thanks for the help. I'll try finding where to twiddle this. > Perhaps explicitly check if the branch's condition is the call to my > intrinsic. > > Or is there another

On Mon, Apr 14, 2008 at 5:02 PM, Bill Wendling <isanbard at gmail.com> wrote: > Then that flow would be explicit in the CFG, right? Then %F wouldn't > be dead, I'm assuming. Right. That's why I used a conditional branch after the intrinsic, but it sounds like the CFG simplification pass after lowering will optimize it away and no longer have the flow explicit. (To the

...sics.td, from llvm_i8_ty, to llvm_anyint_ty: > > def int_memset : Intrinsic<[], > - [llvm_anyptr_ty, llvm_i8_ty, llvm_anyint_ty, > + [llvm_anyptr_ty, llvm_anyint_ty, llvm_anyint_ty, > llvm_i32_ty, llvm_i1_ty], > > IRBuilder.cpp and LangRef.html is updated accordingly. > > To use the intrinsic, the declaration, > > declare void @llvm.memset.p0i8.i32(i8* <dest>, i8 <val>, > i32 <len>, i32 <align>, i1 <isvolatile>)...

...anged, 29 insertions(+) diff --git a/include/llvm/IR/Intrinsics.td b/include/llvm/IR/Intrinsics.td index 83cfebe..8ebeb24 100644 --- a/include/llvm/IR/Intrinsics.td +++ b/include/llvm/IR/Intrinsics.td @@ -640,6 +640,7 @@ def int_masked_scatter: Intrinsic<[], def int_bitset_test : Intrinsic<[llvm_i1_ty], [llvm_ptr_ty, llvm_metadata_ty], [IntrNoMem]>; +def int_typeid_for : Intrinsic<[llvm_i64_ty], [llvm_any_ty], [IntrNoMem]>; //===----------------------------------------------------------------------===// // Target-specific intrinsics //===-----------...

On 2015/8/12 12:57, Alexei Starovoitov wrote: > On Wed, Aug 12, 2015 at 10:34:43AM +0800, Wangnan (F) via llvm-dev wrote: >> Think about a program like this: >> >> struct strA { int a; } >> struct strB { int b; } >> int func() { >> struct strA a; >> struct strB b; >> >> a.a = 1; >> b.b = 2; >>

> On Oct 26, 2014, at 8:22 AM, Hal Finkel <hfinkel at anl.gov> wrote: > > ----- Original Message ----- >> From: "Elena Demikhovsky" <elena.demikhovsky at intel.com> >> To: "Hal Finkel" <hfinkel at anl.gov> >> Cc: llvmdev at cs.uiuc.edu >> Sent: Sunday, October 26, 2014 10:17:49 AM >> Subject: RE: [LLVMdev] Masked vector

Hi, Arm have recently announced the v8.1-M architecture specification for our next generation microcontrollers. The architecture includes vector extensions (MVE) and support for low-overhead branches (LoB), which can be thought of a style of hardware loop. Hardware loops aren't new to LLVM, other backends (at least Hexagon and PPC that I know of) also include support. These implementations