Displaying 14 results from an estimated 14 matches for "mo_regist".
Did you mean:
mo_register
2012 Oct 29
3
[LLVMdev] [llvm-commits] [llvm] r162770 - in /llvm/trunk: include/llvm/CodeGen/MachineOperand.h lib/CodeGen/MachineInstr.cpp
...We do seem to have a compelling reason for it in Hexagon, and I wanted to
make sure that it is OK with everyone. I plan to use it for attributing
target specific info to MOs and in more general case to MIs that those MOs
belongs to.
Part of my question would be - is it still unsafe to use it for
MO_Register and if so, then why?
Thanks a lot.
Sergei
---
Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. is a member of Code Aurora Forum, hosted by
The Linux Foundation
> -----Original Message-----
> From: llvm-commits-bounces at cs.uiuc.edu [mailto:llvm-commits-
> bounces at cs.uiuc.edu] On Behalf Of Jakob...
2012 Oct 29
0
[LLVMdev] [llvm-commits] [llvm] r162770 - in /llvm/trunk: include/llvm/CodeGen/MachineOperand.h lib/CodeGen/MachineInstr.cpp
...pelling reason for it in Hexagon, and I wanted to
> make sure that it is OK with everyone. I plan to use it for attributing
> target specific info to MOs and in more general case to MIs that those MOs
> belongs to.
> Part of my question would be - is it still unsafe to use it for
> MO_Register and if so, then why?
>
> Thanks a lot.
>
> Sergei
>
> ---
> Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. is a member of Code Aurora Forum, hosted by
> The Linux Foundation
>
>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: llvm-commits-bounces at cs.uiuc.edu [mailto:llvm-com...
2012 Aug 22
0
[LLVMdev] No more TargetFlags on MO_Register MachineOperands
...---
>> From: llvmdev-bounces at cs.uiuc.edu [mailto:llvmdev-bounces at cs.uiuc.edu]
>> On Behalf Of Owen Anderson
>> Sent: Tuesday, August 21, 2012 11:37 AM
>> To: Stellard, Thomas
>> Cc: llvmdev at cs.illinois.edu
>> Subject: Re: [LLVMdev] No more TargetFlags on MO_Register
>> MachineOperands
>>
>> Tom,
>>
>> The generally accepted way of achieving this is to leave the built-in
>> pattern on the instruction empty, and to use def : Pat constructs to
>> provide the default values.
>>
>> def : Pat<(fceil R600_...
2012 Aug 22
1
[LLVMdev] No more TargetFlags on MO_Register MachineOperands
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Owen Anderson [mailto:resistor at mac.com]
> Sent: Wednesday, August 22, 2012 11:41 AM
> To: Villmow, Micah
> Cc: Stellard, Thomas; llvmdev at cs.illinois.edu
> Subject: Re: [LLVMdev] No more TargetFlags on MO_Register
> MachineOperands
>
>
> On Aug 22, 2012, at 11:34 AM, "Villmow, Micah" <Micah.Villmow at amd.com>
> wrote:
>
> >
> >
> >> -----Original Message-----
> >> From: llvmdev-bounces at cs.uiuc.edu [mailto:llvmdev-
> bounces at cs.uiu...
2012 Aug 22
2
[LLVMdev] No more TargetFlags on MO_Register MachineOperands
...-----Original Message-----
> From: llvmdev-bounces at cs.uiuc.edu [mailto:llvmdev-bounces at cs.uiuc.edu]
> On Behalf Of Owen Anderson
> Sent: Tuesday, August 21, 2012 11:37 AM
> To: Stellard, Thomas
> Cc: llvmdev at cs.illinois.edu
> Subject: Re: [LLVMdev] No more TargetFlags on MO_Register
> MachineOperands
>
> Tom,
>
> On Aug 21, 2012, at 11:21 AM, Tom Stellard <thomas.stellard at amd.com>
> wrote:
>
> > I've been working on replacing the MachineOperand flags in the R600
> > backend with immediate operands, but I can't figure out h...
2012 Oct 29
2
[LLVMdev] [llvm-commits] [llvm] r162770 - in /llvm/trunk: include/llvm/CodeGen/MachineOperand.h lib/CodeGen/MachineInstr.cpp
Arnold,
I wanted to hear from Jacob is the original patch in question still needed,
since our use of this field could surpass const extenders and could
potentially include MO_Register.
Jacob,
Can you please comment? Thanks.
Sergei
---
Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. is a member of Code Aurora Forum, hosted by
The Linux Foundation
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Arnold Schwaighofer [mailto:arnolds at codeaurora.org]
> Sent: Monday, October 29, 2012 1:02 P...
2012 Aug 21
2
[LLVMdev] No more TargetFlags on MO_Register MachineOperands
Tom,
On Aug 21, 2012, at 11:21 AM, Tom Stellard <thomas.stellard at amd.com> wrote:
> I've been working on replacing the MachineOperand flags in the R600
> backend with immediate operands, but I can't figure out how to modify
> the instruction patterns to make this work. For example, I have the class:
>
> class R600_1OP <bits<32> inst, string opName,
2012 Aug 22
0
[LLVMdev] No more TargetFlags on MO_Register MachineOperands
...>
>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Owen Anderson [mailto:resistor at mac.com]
>> Sent: Wednesday, August 22, 2012 11:41 AM
>> To: Villmow, Micah
>> Cc: Stellard, Thomas; llvmdev at cs.illinois.edu
>> Subject: Re: [LLVMdev] No more TargetFlags on MO_Register
>> MachineOperands
>>
>> Not particularly. There are backends already in existence that make
>> heavy use of it. The key is that def : Pat constructs can take
>> advantage of all of the same mechanisms for factoring out commonality
>> that normal patterns ca...
2012 Aug 21
0
[LLVMdev] No more TargetFlags on MO_Register MachineOperands
On Mon, Aug 20, 2012 at 04:30:13PM -0700, Jakob Stoklund Olesen wrote:
> All,
>
> The code generator operand class, MachineOperand, has an 8-bit TargetFlags field that the individual targets can use as they please. X86 and ARM use it to encode linker magic on symbol operands.
>
> It has been mentioned a couple of times on this list that it is not safe to use TargetFlags on
2012 Aug 20
2
[LLVMdev] No more TargetFlags on MO_Register MachineOperands
All,
The code generator operand class, MachineOperand, has an 8-bit TargetFlags field that the individual targets can use as they please. X86 and ARM use it to encode linker magic on symbol operands.
It has been mentioned a couple of times on this list that it is not safe to use TargetFlags on register operands. This is because many target-independent passes are manipulating register operands
2011 Mar 03
2
[LLVMdev] MachineOperand type
Hi all,
I have a question about the types of MachineOperand. There are 12
different types of MachineOperand such as MO_Register, MO_Immediate and
so on. Some of the names are self-explanatory such as MO_Register and
MO_Immediate. Some of them are a little confusing such as MO_FrameIndex,
MO_ConstantPoolIndex and so on. For example, what is the different
between MO_ExternalSymbol and MO_GlobalAddress? Are these two typ...
2012 Oct 29
0
[LLVMdev] [llvm-commits] [llvm] r162770 - in /llvm/trunk: include/llvm/CodeGen/MachineOperand.h lib/CodeGen/MachineInstr.cpp
On Oct 29, 2012, at 3:28 PM, "Sergei Larin" <slarin at codeaurora.org> wrote:
> Arnold,
>
> I wanted to hear from Jacob is the original patch in question still needed,
> since our use of this field could surpass const extenders and could
> potentially include MO_Register.
>
> Jacob,
>
> Can you please comment? Thanks.
I don't really have anything to add to the commit message. There aren't plans to allow target flags on register operands.
Any particular reason you can't use immediates?
/jakob
>>>>
>>>> URL: h...
2012 Feb 10
1
[LLVMdev] Question about /llvm/trunk/lib/CodeGen/MachineScheduler.cpp
...>> 0x0000000001a0c814 in llvm::MachineOperand::isReg (this=0x7) at
>>>>> /local/mnt/workspace/slarin/tools/llvm-mainline-
>>>> merged/include/llvm/CodeGen/
>>>>> MachineOperand.h:204
>>>>> 204 bool isReg() const { return OpKind == MO_Register; }
>>>>> (gdb) bt
>>>>> #0 0x0000000001a0c814 in llvm::MachineOperand::isReg (this=0x7) at
>>>>> /local/mnt/workspace/slarin/tools/llvm-mainline-
>>>> merged/include/llvm/CodeGen/
>>>>> MachineOperand.h:204
>>>>&...
2012 Apr 19
0
[LLVMdev] Target Dependent Hexagon Packetizer patch
...erand&MO = MI->getOperand(OpNo);
>>
>> switch (MO.getType()) {
>> - default:
>> - assert(0&& "<unknown operand type>");
>> + default: llvm_unreachable ("<unknown operand type>");
>> case MachineOperand::MO_Register:
>> O<< HexagonInstPrinter::getRegisterName(MO.getReg());
>> return;
>> @@ -196,10 +196,45 @@ void HexagonAsmPrinter::printPredicateOperand(const MachineInstr *MI,
>> /// the current output stream.
>> ///
>> void HexagonAsmPrinter::Emit...