search for: p0i32

...d ... 9. %tmp50 = load i64* %2, align 8 // eliminated ... 10. store i64 %tmp50, i64* %3, align 8 // eliminated ... 11. %tv_sec = getelementptr inbounds %struct.timeval* %agg.tmp, i32 0, i32 0 12. %tv_sec.safe_r = call i32* @llvm.guard.load.p0i32(i32* %tv_sec) // intrinsic function call inserted by me 13. %tmp15 = load i32* %tv_sec.safe_r, align 4, !tbaa !4 // this loads the value stored at line 6 14. %tv_usec = getelementptr inbounds %struct.timeval* %agg.tmp, i32 0, i32 1 15. %tv_usec.safe_r = call i32* @llvm.gua...

...                 // >> eliminated ... >> 10.  store i64 %tmp50, i64* %3, align 8                           // >> eliminated ... >> 11.  %tv_sec = getelementptr inbounds %struct.timeval* %agg.tmp, i32 0, i32 >> 0 >> 12.  %tv_sec.safe_r = call i32* @llvm.guard.load.p0i32(i32* %tv_sec)   // >> intrinsic  function call inserted by me >> 13.  %tmp15 = load i32* %tv_sec.safe_r, align 4, !tbaa >> !4                     // this loads the value stored at line 6 >> 14.  %tv_usec = getelementptr inbounds %struct.timeval* %agg.tmp, i32 0, i32 >>...

...2, align 8                               // > eliminated ... > 10.  store i64 %tmp50, i64* %3, align 8                           // > eliminated ... > 11.  %tv_sec = getelementptr inbounds %struct.timeval* %agg.tmp, i32 0, i32 > 0 > 12.  %tv_sec.safe_r = call i32* @llvm.guard.load.p0i32(i32* %tv_sec)   // > intrinsic  function call inserted by me > 13.  %tmp15 = load i32* %tv_sec.safe_r, align 4, !tbaa > !4                     // this loads the value stored at line 6 > 14.  %tv_usec = getelementptr inbounds %struct.timeval* %agg.tmp, i32 0, i32 > 1 > 15.  %tv_use...

declare i8 @llvm.atomic.load.max.i8.p0i8( i8* <ptr>, i8 <delta> ) declare i16 @llvm.atomic.load.max.i16.p0i16( i16* <ptr>, i16 <delta> ) declare i32 @llvm.atomic.load.max.i32.p0i32( i32* <ptr>, i32 <delta> ) declare i64 @llvm.atomic.load.max.i64.p0i64( i64* <ptr>, i64 <delta> ) declare i8 @llvm.atomic.load.min.i8.p0i8( i8* <ptr>, i8 <delta> ) declare i16 @llvm.atomic.load.min.i16.p0i16( i16* <ptr>, i16 <delta> ) declare...

...liminated ... > >> 10. store i64 %tmp50, i64* %3, align 8 // > >> eliminated ... > >> 11. %tv_sec = getelementptr inbounds %struct.timeval* %agg.tmp, i32 0, > i32 > >> 0 > >> 12. %tv_sec.safe_r = call i32* @llvm.guard.load.p0i32(i32* %tv_sec) > // > >> intrinsic function call inserted by me > >> 13. %tmp15 = load i32* %tv_sec.safe_r, align 4, !tbaa > >> !4 // this loads the value stored at line 6 > >> 14. %tv_usec = getelementptr inbounds %struct.timeval* %agg.t...

...0.  store i64 %tmp50, i64* %3, align 8                           // >> >> eliminated ... >> >> 11.  %tv_sec = getelementptr inbounds %struct.timeval* %agg.tmp, i32 0, >> >> i32 >> >> 0 >> >> 12.  %tv_sec.safe_r = call i32* @llvm.guard.load.p0i32(i32* %tv_sec) >> >> // >> >> intrinsic  function call inserted by me >> >> 13.  %tmp15 = load i32* %tv_sec.safe_r, align 4, !tbaa >> >> !4                     // this loads the value stored at line 6 >> >> 14.  %tv_usec = getelementptr inb...

Hi, Great I look forward to the patch! One comment I had was on the name of the overloaded intrinsics. In your example you resolve the atomic.load.add to: @llvm.atomic.load.add.p0i32 // i32 ptr to default address space @llvm.atomic.load.add.p11i32 // i32 ptr to address space 11 and I was wondering could they instead be named: @llvm.atomic.load.add.p0.i32 // i32 ptr to default address space @llvm.atomic.load.add.p11.i32 // i32 ptr to address space 11 For me thi...

...th an address qualified pointer. This will change the name of the intrinsics. When I talked to Dan about this, we thought it made sense to add a pointer qualifier to the name. For example, the name of the atomic add will change from @llvm.atomic.load.add.i32 to @llvm.atomic.load.add.p0i32 // i32 ptr to default address space @llvm.atomic.load.add.p11i32 // i32 ptr to address space 11 This means we will auto convert the old names to the new one. I'm also planning to change clang to generate an error if the compiler implicitly cast a pointer between two different a...

Hi, I should double check this but I viewed the "." as being useful to separate different parameter types in case we need to overload on multiple parameters. I think of p0i32 as the type of a single parameter. If we had multiple parameters with complex types, I think it might become harder to read if we separated each component, .e.g., a hypothetical intrinsic that takes a vector of 4 of pointers to i32 and vector of 4 of pointers to i64 would look either like...

...give an explain? 2010/5/5, 罗勇刚(Yonggang Luo) <luoyonggang at gmail.com>: > declare i8 @llvm.atomic.load.max.i8.p0i8( i8* <ptr>, i8 <delta> ) > declare i16 @llvm.atomic.load.max.i16.p0i16( i16* <ptr>, i16 <delta> ) > declare i32 @llvm.atomic.load.max.i32.p0i32( i32* <ptr>, i32 <delta> ) > declare i64 @llvm.atomic.load.max.i64.p0i64( i64* <ptr>, i64 <delta> ) > declare i8 @llvm.atomic.load.min.i8.p0i8( i8* <ptr>, i8 <delta> ) > declare i16 @llvm.atomic.load.min.i16.p0i16( i16* <ptr>, i16 <delta&g...

On Mon, 7 Jul 2008, Mon P Wang wrote: > I should double check this but I viewed the "." as being useful to > separate different parameter types in case we need to overload on > multiple parameters. I think of p0i32 as the type of a single > parameter. If we had multiple parameters with complex types, I think > it might become harder to read if we separated each component, .e.g., > a hypothetical intrinsic that takes a vector of 4 of pointers to i32 > and vector of 4 of pointers to i64 would look...

...@llvm.memcpy.p0i8.p0i8.i64(i8* align 4 %7, i8* align 4 %8, >> i64 8, i1 false) >> > > also since the dst and src are 4 byte align , can we use the IR below: > > %7 = bitcast %struct.X* %6 to i32* > > %8 = bitcast %struct.X* %5 to i32* > > call void @llvm.memcpy.p0i32.p0i32.i64(i32* align 4 %7, i32* align 4 %8, > i64 8, i1 false) > > >> ret void >> } >> >> how can I transform the llvm.memcpy into data move loop IR and eliminate >> the bitcast instruction ? >> >> Regards >> Jun >> >> >>...

Hal, thank you for your opinion. I just was confused when I saw so long name " llvm.masked.load.v16i32.p0i32.v16i32.i32.v16i1" . If we stay with a short name, we do a step towards instruction form. - Elena -----Original Message----- From: Hal Finkel [mailto:hfinkel at anl.gov] Sent: Sunday, October 26, 2014 17:06 To: Demikhovsky, Elena Cc: llvmdev at cs.uiuc.edu Subject: Re: [LLVMdev] Masked v...

...itcast %struct.X* %5 to i8* > call void @llvm.memcpy.p0i8.p0i8.i64(i8* align 4 %7, i8* align 4 %8, i64 > 8, i1 false) > also since the dst and src are 4 byte align , can we use the IR below: %7 = bitcast %struct.X* %6 to i32* %8 = bitcast %struct.X* %5 to i32* call void @llvm.memcpy.p0i32.p0i32.i64(i32* align 4 %7, i32* align 4 %8, i64 8, i1 false) > ret void > } > > how can I transform the llvm.memcpy into data move loop IR and eliminate > the bitcast instruction ? > > Regards > Jun > > > 2018-01-30 15:24 GMT+08:00 Craig Topper <craig.toppe...

Hi, The proposed masked vector intrinsics are overloaded - one intrinsic ID for multiple types. After name mangling it will look like: %res = call <16 x i32> @llvm.masked.load.v16i32.p0i32.v16i32.i32.v16i1(i32* %addr, <16 x i32>%passthru, i32 4, <16 x i1> %mask) 6 types x 3 vector sizes = 18 names for one operation I propose to remove name mangling from these intrinsics: %res = call <16 x i32> @llvm.masked.load (i32* %addr, <16 x i32>%passthru, i32 4, <16...

Hi Thanks ! so for this example void foo(X &src, X &dst) { dst = src; } and the IR: define void @foo(X&, X&)(%struct.X* dereferenceable(8), %struct.X* dereferenceable(8)) #0 { %3 = alloca %struct.X*, align 8 %4 = alloca %struct.X*, align 8 store %struct.X* %0, %struct.X** %3, align 8 store %struct.X* %1, %struct.X** %4, align 8 %5 = load %struct.X*,

....v4i32.p0f32(float*) It can pass and generate ld2 with "llc -march=aarch64 < ld2.ll". I just think it's strange that the pointer has no relationship with the returned type. Currently there are IR regression test cases using different kinds of pointers like 'xx.ld2.v4i32.p0i32', 'xx.ld2.v4i32.p0v4i32' or 'xx.ld2.v4i32.p0i8', which looks confusing. Should we modify the definition of such intrinsics and restrict the pointer type? If you agree with me, I suggest to use a pointer type to the vector element. Because the 'arm_neon.h' declare the...

On 2008-07-07, at 05:40, Benedict Gaster wrote: > %r1 = call i32 @llvm.atomic.load.add.p0i32( i32 addrspace(0)* > %ptr0, i32 4) > %r2 = call i32 @llvm.atomic.load.add.p11i32( i32 addrspace(11)* > %ptr11, i32 4) > call void @llvm.memory.barrier(i1 true, i1 true, i1 false, i1 false, > i32 11, i1 false) ; force read-modify-write %ptr11 to complete > > A problem with thi...

...Cc: llvmdev at cs.uiuc.edu >> Sent: Sunday, October 26, 2014 10:17:49 AM >> Subject: RE: [LLVMdev] Masked vector intrinsics and name mangling >> >> Hal, thank you for your opinion. >> I just was confused when I saw so long name " >> llvm.masked.load.v16i32.p0i32.v16i32.i32.v16i1" . >> If we stay with a short name, we do a step towards instruction form. > > I completely understand, I just don't think it matters all that much, and the logic necessary to handle it will just become a source of bugs (and thus a distraction). You don't...

...ZSt17__throw_bad_allocv() noreturn declare noalias i8* @_Znwm(i64) declare void @llvm.memcpy.p0i8.p0i8.i64(i8* nocapture, i8* nocapture, i64, i32, i1) nounwind declare void @llvm.memmove.p0i8.p0i8.i64(i8* nocapture, i8* nocapture, i64, i32, i1) nounwind declare i32 @llvm.atomic.load.add.i32.p0i32(i32* nocapture, i32) nounwind declare void @llvm.memory.barrier(i1, i1, i1, i1, i1) nounwind declare void @_ZSt20__throw_out_of_rangePKc(i8*) noreturn declare i64 @strlen(i8*) declare void @abort() Xiaolong