Displaying 4 results from an estimated 4 matches for "oldop".
Did you mean:
ldop
2012 Nov 14
4
[LLVMdev] About a problem in SROA
...A?
With the following patch, it seems the problem can be fixed. Any idea?
diff --git a/lib/Transforms/Scalar/SROA.cpp b/lib/Transforms/Scalar/SROA.cpp
index d95c855..696107a 100644
--- a/lib/Transforms/Scalar/SROA.cpp
+++ b/lib/Transforms/Scalar/SROA.cpp
@@ -2608,8 +2608,6 @@ private:
assert(OldOp == OldPtr);
IRBuilder<> IRB(&SI);
- if (VecTy)
- return rewriteVectorizedStoreInst(IRB, SI, OldOp);
Type *ValueTy = SI.getValueOperand()->getType();
uint64_t Size = EndOffset - BeginOffset;
@@ -2644,6 +2642,9 @@ private:
return IsConvertable;
}
+...
2018 Jan 04
1
InstAlias with tied operands - can it be supported?
Hi Daniel,
I defined checkEarlyTargetMatchPredicate() to explicitly check for the
tied operands, and it worked.
I could define an alias like: InstAlias<"oldOP $rd, $rd, $rs1", (NEWOP
$rd, $rs1)>
However, I had to additionally change AsmMatcherEmitter 'Hack' variable
setting to allow the repeated operand $rd in the AsmString.
Do you or anyone else know the history with this 'Hack' flag?
Thanks,
Ana.
diff --git a/utils/TableGe...
2017 Dec 15
0
InstAlias with tied operands - can it be supported?
Hi,
On Instructions you can use checkEarlyTargetMatchPredicate() to check that the operands are the same. There's an example of that in MipsAsmParser.cpp for DATI and DAHI. I can't think of a reason TableGen couldn't be made to allow this for InstAlias too.
> On 15 Dec 2017, at 02:12, via llvm-dev <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote:
>
> Hello,
>
> InstAlias
2017 Dec 15
2
InstAlias with tied operands - can it be supported?
Hello,
InstAlias does not allow tied operands (repeated operands) in the asm
string to be matched.
It seems this situation is explicitly prevented in
AsmMatcherEmitter.cpp:
if (!Hack)
PrintFatalError(TheDef->getLoc(),
"ERROR: matchable with tied operand '" + Tok +
"' can never be matched!");