Displaying 20 results from an estimated 26 matches for "mflr".
Did you mean:
flr
2004 May 09
0
[LLVMdev] Testing LLVM on OS X
...t; Yup, this is EXACTLY what is going on.
>
> I took this very simple C function:
>
> int Array[1000];
> void test(int X) {
> int i;
> for (i = 0; i < 1000; ++i)
> Array[i] += X;
> }
>
> Compile with -O3 on OS/X gave me this:
>
> _test:
> mflr r5
> bcl 20,31,"L00000000001$pb"
> "L00000000001$pb":
> mflr r2
> mtlr r5
> addis r4,r2,ha16(L_Array$non_lazy_ptr-"L00000000001$pb")
> li r2,0
> lwz r9,lo16(L_Array$non_lazy_ptr-"L00000000001$pb&...
2012 May 02
4
[LLVMdev] [cfe-dev] Odd PPC inline asm constraint
...(ie, it was able to call into libc.so just fine), as well as an
old C version of the SPEC97 tomcatv benchmark I have laying around.
So it seems both 32-bit and 64-bit can call into shared libs.
Not to say I haven't seen some code gen warts (using -O3). :)
>From hello.s:
main:
mflr 0
stw 31, -4(1)
stw 0, 4(1)
stwu 1, -16(1)
lis 3, .Lstr at ha
mr 31, 1
la 3, .Lstr at l(3)
bl puts
li 3, 0
addi 1, 1, 16
lwz 0, 4(1)
lwz 31, -4(1)
mtlr 0
blr
By the strict letter of the 32-bit...
2004 May 04
0
[LLVMdev] Testing LLVM on OS X
On Tue, 4 May 2004, Patrick Flanagan wrote:
> I was able to run through all the C/C++ benchmarks in SPEC using LLVM.
> I'm on OS X 10.3.3. I did a quick comparison between LLVM (latest from
> CVS as of 4/27) and gcc 3.3 (Apple's build 20030304). For simplicity's
> sake, the only flag I used was -O3 for each compiler and I was using
> the C backend to generate native
2004 May 04
2
[LLVMdev] Testing LLVM on OS X
I was able to run through all the C/C++ benchmarks in SPEC using LLVM.
I'm on OS X 10.3.3. I did a quick comparison between LLVM (latest from
CVS as of 4/27) and gcc 3.3 (Apple's build 20030304). For simplicity's
sake, the only flag I used was -O3 for each compiler and I was using
the C backend to generate native code for PPC.
Most of the LLVM results were close to gcc
2012 Jul 19
2
[LLVMdev] Help with PPC64 JIT
...loaded correctly in 'JIT::runFunction', instead of assuming the JIT function code is
an ODP.
Now I'm trying to make the relocation work properly. Using the testcase '2003-01-04-ArgumentBug'
the assembly generated for main functions is the following:
.L.main:
# BB#0:
mflr 0
std 0, 16(1)
stdu 1, -112(1)
lis 3, .LCPI1_0 at ha
li 4, 1
lfs 1, .LCPI1_0 at l(3)
li 3, 0
bl foo
nop
addi 1, 1, 112
ld 0, 16(1)
mtlr 0
blr
Which is correct, however for the JIT one generated in m...
2012 May 02
0
[LLVMdev] [cfe-dev] Odd PPC inline asm constraint
On Tue, 2012-05-01 at 17:47 -0500, Hal Finkel wrote:
> By default it should build for
> whatever the current host is (no special flags required). To
> specifically build for something else, use:
> -ccc-host-triple powerpc64-unknown-linux-gnu
> or
> -ccc-host-triple powerpc-unknown-linux-gnu
So LLVM isn't biarch capable? Meaning one LLVM compiler cannot
generate both
2004 May 04
6
[LLVMdev] Testing LLVM on OS X
...at GCC is doing a very good job (ie, without
> syntactic loops).
Yup, this is EXACTLY what is going on.
I took this very simple C function:
int Array[1000];
void test(int X) {
int i;
for (i = 0; i < 1000; ++i)
Array[i] += X;
}
Compile with -O3 on OS/X gave me this:
_test:
mflr r5
bcl 20,31,"L00000000001$pb"
"L00000000001$pb":
mflr r2
mtlr r5
addis r4,r2,ha16(L_Array$non_lazy_ptr-"L00000000001$pb")
li r2,0
lwz r9,lo16(L_Array$non_lazy_ptr-"L00000000001$pb")(r4)
li r4,1000...
2012 May 12
0
[LLVMdev] [cfe-dev] Odd PPC inline asm constraint
...st fine), as well as an
> old C version of the SPEC97 tomcatv benchmark I have laying around.
> So it seems both 32-bit and 64-bit can call into shared libs.
>
> Not to say I haven't seen some code gen warts (using -O3). :)
>
> From hello.s:
>
> main:
> mflr 0
> stw 31, -4(1)
> stw 0, 4(1)
> stwu 1, -16(1)
> lis 3, .Lstr at ha
> mr 31, 1
> la 3, .Lstr at l(3)
> bl puts
> li 3, 0
> addi 1, 1, 16
> lwz 0, 4(1)
> lwz 31, -4(1)
>...
2012 Jul 20
0
[LLVMdev] Help with PPC64 JIT
...ction', instead of assuming the JIT function code is
> an ODP.
>
> Now I'm trying to make the relocation work properly. Using the testcase '2003-01-04-ArgumentBug'
> the assembly generated for main functions is the following:
>
> .L.main:
> # BB#0:
> mflr 0
> std 0, 16(1)
> stdu 1, -112(1)
> lis 3, .LCPI1_0 at ha
> li 4, 1
> lfs 1, .LCPI1_0 at l(3)
> li 3, 0
> bl foo
> nop
> addi 1, 1, 112
> ld 0, 16(1)
> mtlr 0
>...
2004 Sep 14
1
Re: got pointer wrong in shared klibc binary
...klibc-0.173/klibc/arch/ppc64/setjmp.S klibc/klibc/arch/ppc64/setjmp.S
--- klibc-0.173/klibc/arch/ppc64/setjmp.S 2003-12-13 14:09:13.000000000 +1030
+++ klibc/klibc/arch/ppc64/setjmp.S 2004-09-15 12:28:42.160328339 +0930
@@ -17,13 +16,33 @@ setjmp:
.globl setjmp
.globl .setjmp
.setjmp:
- mflr %r11 /* save return address */
- mfcr %r12 /* save condition register */
- mr %r10,%r1 /* save stack pointer */
- mr %r9,%r2 /* save GPR2 (not needed) */
- stmw %r9,0(%r3)...
2012 May 01
4
[LLVMdev] [cfe-dev] Odd PPC inline asm constraint
On Tue, 01 May 2012 17:23:07 -0500
Peter Bergner <bergner at vnet.ibm.com> wrote:
> On Tue, 2012-05-01 at 16:06 -0500, Hal Finkel wrote:
> > LLVM/clang now will build in the normal way (./configure; make
> > install) on PPC (you'll need at least the 3.1 release candidate (or
> > trunk)). I generally build on my PPC64 hosts with:
> > make ENABLE_OPTIMIZED=1
2012 Sep 20
2
[LLVMdev] Scheduling question (memory dependency)
...n 2
...
---------------------------------------------------------------
The code works OK at -O0. At -O1, the first part of the generated code
is:
---------------------------------------------------------------
.L._Z5check3foos:
.cfi_startproc
# BB#0: # %entry
mflr 0
std 0, 16(1)
stdu 1, -112(1)
.Ltmp1:
.cfi_def_cfa_offset 112
.Ltmp2:
.cfi_offset lr, 16
lha 5, 162(1)
sth 3, 162(1)
...
---------------------------------------------------------------
The problem here is that the incoming parameter in register 3 is stored
too late, after an attempt...
2011 Sep 17
0
[LLVMdev] Problem with Linux PPC64 assembly output.
The latest binutils (2.21.2) assembler for the PPC64 complains about the .size
directive emitted by LLVM as not containing an absolute expression.
An example:
__umodsi3:
.quad .L.__umodsi3,.TOC. at tocbase
.previous
.L.__umodsi3:
mflr 0
[snip]
mtlr 0
blr
.Ltmp0:
.size __umodsi3, .Ltmp0-__umodsi3
The correct size expression should be .Ltmp0-.L.__umodsi3
The code which does this is in AsmPrinter.cpp:
// If the target wants a .size directive for the size of the function, emit
// it.
if (MAI->h...
2012 Sep 21
0
[LLVMdev] Scheduling question (memory dependency)
...----------------------------
>
> The code works OK at -O0. At -O1, the first part of the generated code
> is:
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------
> .L._Z5check3foos:
> .cfi_startproc
> # BB#0: # %entry
> mflr 0
> std 0, 16(1)
> stdu 1, -112(1)
> .Ltmp1:
> .cfi_def_cfa_offset 112
> .Ltmp2:
> .cfi_offset lr, 16
> lha 5, 162(1)
> sth 3, 162(1)
> ...
> ---------------------------------------------------------------
>
> The problem here is that the incoming...
2012 Sep 21
2
[LLVMdev] Scheduling question (memory dependency)
...code works OK at -O0. At -O1, the first part of the generated
> > code
> > is:
> >
> > ---------------------------------------------------------------
> > .L._Z5check3foos:
> > .cfi_startproc
> > # BB#0: # %entry
> > mflr 0
> > std 0, 16(1)
> > stdu 1, -112(1)
> > .Ltmp1:
> > .cfi_def_cfa_offset 112
> > .Ltmp2:
> > .cfi_offset lr, 16
> > lha 5, 162(1)
> > sth 3, 162(1)
> > ...
> > ---------------------------------------------------------------...
2012 Sep 21
2
[LLVMdev] Scheduling question (memory dependency)
...t; code
> > > > is:
> > > >
> > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------
> > > > .L._Z5check3foos:
> > > > .cfi_startproc
> > > > # BB#0: # %entry
> > > > mflr 0
> > > > std 0, 16(1)
> > > > stdu 1, -112(1)
> > > > .Ltmp1:
> > > > .cfi_def_cfa_offset 112
> > > > .Ltmp2:
> > > > .cfi_offset lr, 16
> > > > lha 5, 162(1)
> > > > sth 3, 162(1)
> > >...
2012 Sep 21
0
[LLVMdev] Scheduling question (memory dependency)
...part of the generated
> > > code
> > > is:
> > >
> > > ---------------------------------------------------------------
> > > .L._Z5check3foos:
> > > .cfi_startproc
> > > # BB#0: # %entry
> > > mflr 0
> > > std 0, 16(1)
> > > stdu 1, -112(1)
> > > .Ltmp1:
> > > .cfi_def_cfa_offset 112
> > > .Ltmp2:
> > > .cfi_offset lr, 16
> > > lha 5, 162(1)
> > > sth 3, 162(1)
> > > ...
> > > -------------...
2003 Dec 12
2
[PATCH] ppc64 support
...ongjmp implementation
+# This file was derived from the equivalent file in NetBSD
+#
+
+ .text
+ .align 4
+
+ .section ".opd","aw"
+setjmp:
+ .quad .setjmp,.TOC.@tocbase,0
+ .previous
+ .size setjmp,24
+ .type .setjmp,@function
+ .globl setjmp
+ .globl .setjmp
+.setjmp:
+ mflr %r11 /* save return address */
+ mfcr %r12 /* save condition register */
+ mr %r10,%r1 /* save stack pointer */
+ mr %r9,%r2 /* save GPR2 (not needed) */
+ stmw %r9,0(%r3)...
2012 Sep 21
0
[LLVMdev] Scheduling question (memory dependency)
...:
> > > > >
> > > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------
> > > > > .L._Z5check3foos:
> > > > > .cfi_startproc
> > > > > # BB#0: # %entry
> > > > > mflr 0
> > > > > std 0, 16(1)
> > > > > stdu 1, -112(1)
> > > > > .Ltmp1:
> > > > > .cfi_def_cfa_offset 112
> > > > > .Ltmp2:
> > > > > .cfi_offset lr, 16
> > > > > lha 5, 162(1)
> > >...
2013 Dec 03
0
[klibc:master] ppc64: Add ppc64le support
...LF == 2
+ .type setjmp, at function
+setjmp:
+#else
.section ".opd","aw"
+ .balign 8
setjmp:
- .quad .setjmp,.TOC. at tocbase,0
+ .quad .setjmp, .TOC. at tocbase, 0
.previous
- .size setjmp,24
.type .setjmp, at function
- .globl setjmp
.globl .setjmp
.setjmp:
+#endif
mflr %r11 /* save return address */
mfcr %r12 /* save condition register */
std %r2,0(%r3) /* save TOC pointer (not needed) */
@@ -43,17 +47,28 @@ setjmp:
std %r31,8(%r3)
li %r3,0 /* indicate success */
blr /* return */
+#if _CALL_ELF == 2
+ .size setjmp,.-setjmp
+#else
+ .size setjm...