Displaying 4 results from an estimated 4 matches for "memrefflag".
Did you mean:
memrefflags
2009 Aug 01
0
[LLVMdev] RFC: SDNode Flags
...TList VTs, MVT MemoryVT,
> const Value *srcValue, int SVOff,
> unsigned alignment, unsigned flags);
>
> and called like this:
>
> new (N) LoadSDNode(..., isVolatile|isNonTemporal);
>
> Thoughts?
This sounds reasonable. I'd suggest using names like MemRefFlags rather
than isVolatileisNonTemporal, but that's just a detail :-).
My biggest concern is how this is encoded in the SDNode. It'd be
good to avoid making MemSDNode bigger, but there are a variety of ways
that exiting bits can be made available. NodeType doesn't need all 16
of
its b...
2009 Aug 03
2
[LLVMdev] RFC: SDNode Flags
...t
> SDNode. With the current SDNode allocation strategy, making it
> bigger will increase the allocation needed for all nodes.
Ok.
> > new (N) LoadSDNode(..., isVolatile|isNonTemporal);
> >
> > Thoughts?
>
> This sounds reasonable. I'd suggest using names like MemRefFlags rather
> than isVolatileisNonTemporal, but that's just a detail :-).
There's a pipe there. :)
> My biggest concern is how this is encoded in the SDNode. It'd be
> good to avoid making MemSDNode bigger, but there are a variety of ways
> that exiting bits can be made avai...
2009 Jul 31
4
[LLVMdev] RFC: SDNode Flags
Right now the MemSDNode keeps a volatile bit in the SubclassData to mark
volatile memory operations.
We have some changes we'd like to push back that adds a NonTemporal flag
to MemSDNode to mark instructions where movnt (on x86) and other goodness
can happen (we'll also add the TableGen patterns to properly select movnt).
In our tree we simply added another flag to the MemSDNode
2009 Aug 03
0
[LLVMdev] RFC: SDNode Flags
...e allocation strategy, making it
>> bigger will increase the allocation needed for all nodes.
>
> Ok.
>
>
>>> new (N) LoadSDNode(..., isVolatile|isNonTemporal);
>>>
>>> Thoughts?
>>
>> This sounds reasonable. I'd suggest using names like MemRefFlags
>> rather
>> than isVolatileisNonTemporal, but that's just a detail :-).
>
> There's a pipe there. :)
Oops. I blame my font ;-).
>
>> My biggest concern is how this is encoded in the SDNode. It'd be
>> good to avoid making MemSDNode bigger, but th...