search for: mergevalu

Displaying 7 results from an estimated 7 matches for "mergevalu".

Did you mean: merge_value
2008 Sep 01
2
[LLVMdev] Type Legalizer - Load handling problem
...de is used for example to replace i32 = truncate 0x2374b48 with the first result of i32,ch = load 0x2356390, 0x2357188, 0x2356b88 <0x236ee80:0> alignment=4 This works fine right now. It fails with ReplaceNodeWith because the number of results differs. It could be made to work by using a MergeValues node to produce a node with one result out of the load, and similarly for the other examples of this kind of thing. Ciao, Duncan.
2007 Sep 28
0
[LLVMdev] Lowering operations to 8-bit!
...xpandOp should have been called to split the register up. I'd suggest going up the stack to figure out who called LegalizeOp instead of ExpandOp. > Here is my code in the formalizing arguments (copied ISD::MERGE_VALUES > from PowerPC implementation, not sure if it is really needed) MergeValues is required because the FORMAL_ARGUMENTs node returns one value for each argument input to the function, and also a chain value. These have to match up correctly. -Chris
2007 Sep 28
2
[LLVMdev] Lowering operations to 8-bit!
Attached please find the gdb backtrace dump and the postscript file of the DAG right before assertion. The red Node is the current Node in LegalizeOp() The only thing that I am customizing before we get here is the FORMAL_ARGUMENTS. At this time I don't really care about the arguments, just want to get some global values working. When I trace the program, it is well passed the legalizing of
2008 Aug 29
2
[LLVMdev] Type Legalizer - Load handling problem
> > LOAD node has two values but the assertion checks N->getNumValues() == 1 > > which is not letting us change load operation. > > Yup, in this case you need to return an SDValue with null Val field, > and take care of replacing values yourself. That said, it looks like it is done this way because no-one needed anything more. It could easily be changed to handle the
2008 Aug 29
0
[LLVMdev] Type Legalizer - Load handling problem
On Fri, 2008-08-29 at 17:28 +0200, Duncan Sands wrote: > > > LOAD node has two values but the assertion checks N->getNumValues() == 1 > > > which is not letting us change load operation. > > > > Yup, in this case you need to return an SDValue with null Val field, > > and take care of replacing values yourself. > > That said, it looks like it is done
2008 Sep 01
0
[LLVMdev] Type Legalizer - Load handling problem
...replace > i32 = truncate 0x2374b48 > with the first result of > i32,ch = load 0x2356390, 0x2357188, 0x2356b88 <0x236ee80:0> alignment=4 > This works fine right now. It fails with ReplaceNodeWith because the > number of results differs. It could be made to work by using a MergeValues > node to produce a node with one result out of the load, and similarly for > the other examples of this kind of thing. > I think we will have to go that way since I may want to replace a "store" node also (A store node does not produce any results). In this case ReplaceNodeWi...
2007 Sep 28
2
[LLVMdev] Lowering operations to 8-bit!
...xpandOp should have been called to split the register up. I'd suggest going up the stack to figure out who called LegalizeOp instead of ExpandOp. > Here is my code in the formalizing arguments (copied ISD::MERGE_VALUES > from PowerPC implementation, not sure if it is really needed) MergeValues is required because the FORMAL_ARGUMENTs node returns one value for each argument input to the function, and also a chain value. These have to match up correctly. -Chris _______________________________________________ LLVM Developers mailing list LLVMdev at cs.uiuc.edu http://llvm.c...