Displaying 20 results from an estimated 21 matches for "llvmti".
Did you mean:
llvmty
2012 Jul 27
2
[LLVMdev] TLI.getSetCCResultType() and/or MVT broken by design?
I'm running into lots of problems with this call back. Mostly the problem occurs because this callback is used before types are legalized. However, the code generator does not have a 1-1 correspondence between all LLVM types and the codegen types. This leads to problems when getSetCCResultType is passed in an invalid type, but has a valid LLVM type attached to it. An example is <3 x
2012 Jul 27
0
[LLVMdev] TLI.getSetCCResultType() and/or MVT broken by design?
Hi Micah,
I think that getSetCCResultType should only be called for legal types. Disabling it on isPow2VectorType is not the way to go because there are other illegal vector types which are pow-of-two. I suggest that you call it only after type-legalization.
BTW, you can't set the LLVMTy yourself because you don't have access to the LLVMContext at that point.
Nadav
From:
2012 Jul 27
2
[LLVMdev] TLI.getSetCCResultType() and/or MVT broken by design?
if (N0.getOpcode() == ISD::SETCC
&& (LegalOperations
|| (!LegalOperations && VT.isPow2VectorType())))
But the comment right after it is:
// sext(setcc) -> sext_in_reg(vsetcc) for vectors.
// Only do this before legalize for now.
if (VT.isVector() && !LegalOperations) {
So, these optimizations are never safe in the general case if we can't
2012 Jul 27
0
[LLVMdev] TLI.getSetCCResultType() and/or MVT broken by design?
We no longer have vsetcc, so the comment is wrong. The code looks incorrect. The fact that a vector is power-of-two does not guarantee anything about its legality. For example <128 x i64> would pass the condition in the code below, and die on most targets.
From: Villmow, Micah [mailto:Micah.Villmow at amd.com]
Sent: Friday, July 27, 2012 22:33
To: Rotem, Nadav; Developers Mailing List
2009 Aug 18
2
[LLVMdev] gcc4.4's -O2 is breaking include/llvm/CodeGen/ValueTypes.h
I was running into a problem with compiling llvm with gcc 4.4 on
fedora 11 with --enable-optimized. I was seeing this warning dozens of
times:
/net/hakodate/scratch/llvm/llvm/include/llvm/CodeGen/ValueTypes.h: In
member function
‘llvm::SDNode*<unnamed>::SPUDAGToDAGISel::Select(llvm::SDValue)’:
/net/hakodate/scratch/llvm/llvm/include/llvm/CodeGen/ValueTypes.h:362:
warning: comparison always
2009 Apr 07
6
[LLVMdev] Porting to System z
I searched the archives and found this from last month:
I ran into the same problem and fixed it by forcing the
MVT::SimpleValueType enum to be 64 bits so that all of the types
in the union later in the class are the same size. I tested this
on ppc64 and x86_64.
Index: include/llvm/CodeGen/ValueTypes.h
===================================================================
---
2009 Apr 07
0
[LLVMdev] Porting to System z
* Neale Ferguson:
> So the SimpleTy variable which is a SimpleTypeValue is behaving strangely.
> It's found within a private definition:
>
> union {
> uintptr_t V;
> SimpleValueType SimpleTy;
> const Type *LLVMTy;
> };
>
> The comment in the above fix indicates that in this 64-bit system the enum
> needs to be 64-bits is correct,
2009 Aug 19
0
[LLVMdev] gcc4.4's -O2 is breaking include/llvm/CodeGen/ValueTypes.h
On Aug 18, 2009, at 11:50 AM, Erick Tryzelaar wrote:
> I was running into a problem with compiling llvm with gcc 4.4 on
> fedora 11 with --enable-optimized. I was seeing this warning dozens of
> times:
>
> /net/hakodate/scratch/llvm/llvm/include/llvm/CodeGen/ValueTypes.h: In
> member function
> ‘llvm::SDNode*<unnamed>::SPUDAGToDAGISel::Select(llvm::SDValue)’:
>
2009 Apr 07
2
[LLVMdev] Porting to System z
Yes, that works much better. However, I fear the problem is more to do with
trying to force enums to be a different size which appears not to be
supported by most compilers. The IBM C++ compiler apparently has a #pragma
which can be used to do it and gcc 4.3 seems to be happy with the hack
described but as Duncan says trying to force this behavior in a union is
probably less than desirable in the
2009 Feb 24
3
[LLVMdev] [llvm-commits] [llvm] r65296 - in /llvm/trunk: include/llvm/CodeGen/ lib/CodeGen/SelectionDAG/ lib/Target/CellSPU/ lib/Target/PowerPC/ lib/Target/X86/ test/CodeGen/X86/
I believe this patch has broken a PPC app that I am tracking. Here is
a reduced test case. Reproduce with llc -mattr=+Altivec -mcpu=g5. The
backtrace looks like this:
#0 0x9333ae42 in __kill ()
#1 0x9333ae34 in kill$UNIX2003 ()
#2 0x933ad23a in raise ()
#3 0x933b9679 in abort ()
#4 0x933ae3db in __assert_rtn ()
#5 0x0008bd8f in llvm::MVT::getVectorElementType (this=0xbfffdda4) at
2009 Feb 25
3
[LLVMdev] [llvm-commits] [llvm] r65296 - in /llvm/trunk: include/llvm/CodeGen/ lib/CodeGen/SelectionDAG/ lib/Target/CellSPU/ lib/Target/PowerPC/ lib/Target/X86/ test/CodeGen/X86/
Things are still broken. Unfortunately llvm test suite does not
contain enough vector code to fully test this. Can you revert the
patch first?
Evan
On Feb 24, 2009, at 7:14 PM, Scott Michel wrote:
> Evan:
>
> I did not encounter this back trace before I committed the newest
> BuildVectorSDNode patch, which removed all class instance members
> and passes results back via
2009 Feb 25
0
[LLVMdev] [llvm-commits] [llvm] r65296 - in /llvm/trunk: include/llvm/CodeGen/ lib/CodeGen/SelectionDAG/ lib/Target/CellSPU/ lib/Target/PowerPC/ lib/Target/X86/ test/CodeGen/X86/
Evan:
I work on reverting it, although, when I tried yesterday, it wasn't
particularly clean (lots of rejected patches, presumably due to intervening
commits.)
Are you still getting the backtrace or is this just a case of incorrectly
generated code?
-scooter
On Wed, Feb 25, 2009 at 10:09 AM, Evan Cheng <echeng at apple.com> wrote:
> Things are still broken. Unfortunately llvm
2009 Feb 25
0
[LLVMdev] [llvm-commits] [llvm] r65296 - in /llvm/trunk: include/llvm/CodeGen/ lib/CodeGen/SelectionDAG/ lib/Target/CellSPU/ lib/Target/PowerPC/ lib/Target/X86/ test/CodeGen/X86/
Evan:
I did not encounter this back trace before I committed the newest
BuildVectorSDNode patch, which removed all class instance members and passes
results back via reference parameters.
-scooter
On Tue, Feb 24, 2009 at 11:39 AM, Evan Cheng <evan.cheng at apple.com> wrote:
> I believe this patch has broken a PPC app that I am tracking. Here is a
> reduced test case. Reproduce
2009 Apr 07
0
[LLVMdev] Porting to System z
Hello,
> +static const uintptr_t minus_one = -1;
-1 here is of signed int type. What if you will use -1ULL ?
--
With best regards, Anton Korobeynikov
Faculty of Mathematics and Mechanics, Saint Petersburg State University
2009 Apr 08
0
[LLVMdev] Porting to System z
Hi Neale,
> Yes, that works much better. However, I fear the problem is more to do with
> trying to force enums to be a different size which appears not to be
> supported by most compilers. The IBM C++ compiler apparently has a #pragma
> which can be used to do it and gcc 4.3 seems to be happy with the hack
> described but as Duncan says trying to force this behavior in a union is
2013 Feb 28
0
[LLVMdev] getSetCC
We have is a problem in getSetCCResult(), which we overload because we support setCC for vectors. However, where other targets can get away with merely converting the EVT that gets passed to getSetCCResult() to an integer type (which EVT conveniently provides a method to do), we need to convert to int AND promote to i32 (or, in some cases, i64). This requires doing something that the EVT
2009 Mar 02
1
[LLVMdev] [llvm-commits] [llvm] r65296 - in /llvm/trunk: include/llvm/CodeGen/ lib/CodeGen/SelectionDAG/ lib/Target/CellSPU/ lib/Target/PowerPC/ lib/Target/X86/ test/CodeGen/X86/
Scott,
In case you missed it, I reimplemented your
BuildVectorSDNode::isConstantSplat method following the suggestions
from Chris. The revised version passes "make check" for llvm.
Assuming that it also passes Evan's tests, I think it should also do
what you need for CellSPU.
On Feb 25, 2009, at 12:16 PM, Scott Michel wrote:
> Evan:
>
> I work on reverting it,
2009 Apr 07
0
[LLVMdev] Porting to System z
Hi,
> llvm[1]: Building Intrinsics.gen.tmp from Intrinsics.td
> tblgen: IntrinsicEmitter.cpp:163: void EmitTypeForValueType(std::ostream&,
> llvm::MVT::SimpleValueType): Assertion `false && "Unsupported ValueType!"'
> failed.
this came up before IIRC, but I don't remember the details - buggy system
compiler? Try searching the archives. Also, if you
2009 Apr 07
2
[LLVMdev] Porting to System z
Hi,
I am beginning the porting process for Linux on System z (aka IBM
Mainframe). I thought I¹d build LLVM first with the c and cpp backends so
that tools like TableGen would be created that I¹d then use to process the
.td files that I¹ll be creating. So I used svn to grab the code from the
repository and ran configure and make. However, the build breaks at this
point:
llvm[1]: Building
2009 Feb 24
0
[LLVMdev] [llvm-commits] [llvm] r65296 - in /llvm/trunk: include/llvm/CodeGen/ lib/CodeGen/SelectionDAG/ lib/Target/CellSPU/ lib/Target/PowerPC/ lib/Target/X86/ test/CodeGen/X86/
Duncan:
I'm still stymied how this whole thread ended up about shuffle vector nodes,
when the original problem was my build vector patch. I'm still working on
backing the build vector patch out (it isn't clean with all of the
intervening commits and I have pressing management tasks which command my
attention.)
-scooter
On Tue, Feb 24, 2009 at 12:28 AM, Duncan Sands <baldrick at