search for: postrascheduling

hi, I have few question about breaking anti-dependence of postRAScheduler in LLVM. when I use command line "clang -target arm -mcpu=cortex-a8 -O2 -integrated-as -c test.c -o test.o" and get objdump file as follows: ldrr1, [r0,#16]----(1 str r1, [r0,#32]----(2 ldr r1, [r0,#12]----(3 str r1, [r0,#36]----(4 ldr r1, [r0,#08]----(5 str r1, [r0,#40]----(6 However, I expect that instruction

I am trying to understand why PostRAScheduling is done only for ARM. Is there any limitation which prevents this from being done for x86 ? Thanks, Karthik -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/attachments/20110111/ecdf61db/attachment.html>

Is there any specific documentation on this? Is there a point of contact for this file that I might bug? So I have an instruction that needs noops inserted and it appears that the noops are being inserted in the EmitSchedule function of the PostRAScheduler. From the loop in EmitSchedule it looks like it's inserting noops whenever SUnit is NULL. I don't see anything in the DAG that appears

On Jan 11, 2011, at 2:56 PM, JG wrote: > I am trying to understand why PostRAScheduling is done only for ARM. Is there any limitation which prevents this from being done for x86 ? It's a 10% increase in overall compile time, and it does not help very much for x86. The out-of-order execution on new x86 chips hide any benefits from late scheduling. /jakob

----- Original Message ----- > > > > hi, > I have few question about breaking anti-dependence of postRAScheduler > in LLVM. > when I use command line "clang -target arm -mcpu=cortex-a8 -O2 > -integrated-as -c test.c -o test.o" > and get objdump file as follows: > ldr r1, [r0,#16]----(1 > str r1, [r0,#32]----(2 > ldr r1, [r0,#12]----(3 > str r1,

Hi, I’m facing a crash issue (--target=arm-linux-gnueabi -march=armv8-a+crc -mfloat-abi=hard) and debugging the problem, I found that an intended branch was not taken due to bad code generation after the Post RA Scheduler pass. A CMPri instruction after an INLINEASM block (which inturn contains a cmp, bne instruction) is being moved before the INLINEASM block incorrectly resulting in two

Hello, Is it possible to activate the MIPS code emitter during Post-RA scheduler. I tried including both MipsCodeEmitter.cpp and JITCodeEmitter.h to PostRASchedulerList.cpp, but when I rebuild the compiler I get an error that says “/lib/Target/Mips/MCTargetDesc/MipsMCTargetDesc.h fatal error: MipsGenRegisterInfo.inc file not found”. I’m assuming that the MipsGenRegisterInfo.inc is not yet

Amara, first, thank you for answering. but I found expandPsuedo instructions actually happens before post-RA, like the following code showing: your approach is a little hacky, right? : ) // Expand pseudo instructions before second scheduling pass. addPass(&ExpandPostRAPseudosID); printAndVerify("After ExpandPostRAPseudos"); // Run pre-sched2 passes. if (addPreSched2())

I think this after a second. I got your point. I can define a pseudo instruction for an instr-pair and expand it after post-RA-sched. as you said, in preEmitPass. The original intrinsic can also be kept. I just convert the intrinsic to pseudo instruction in TargetLower. Thank you for your enlightening suggestion! thanks, --lx On Sat, Nov 23, 2013 at 8:37 PM, Amara Emerson <amara.emerson at

What are you actually trying to do? The code emitters have nothing to do with the post-RA scheduler. -Jim On May 30, 2013, at 6:23 AM, Jafar J <pluck90 at hotmail.com> wrote: > Hello, > > Is it possible to activate the MIPS code emitter during Post-RA scheduler. I tried including both MipsCodeEmitter.cpp and JITCodeEmitter.h to PostRASchedulerList.cpp, but when I rebuild

I need to represent each instruction with its (32-bit) binary encoding, and I reached to a conclusion that I could get the encoding through the MipsCodeEmitter. What I’m trying to do exactly is write a scheduler which tries to minimize the switching activity between the scheduled instructions in each basic block. One way to do that is by representing each instruction with its complete binary

On Feb 21, 2013, at 9:11 AM, Jonas Paulsson <jonas.paulsson at ericsson.com> wrote: > Hi, > > I am trying to add Hazard scheduling nodes after buildSchedGraph(), with a scheduler derived from ScheduleDAGInstrs. I get weird errors, so I wonder what I am doing wrong? > > What I am doing right now is: > > I have a created MI with opcode HAZARD that does not have

What I meant was to write your own expansion pass and run it after the scheduler passes, e.g. in the pre-emit stage. > if (addPreEmitPass()) printAndVerify("After PreEmit passes") Though if it's too hacky for you then fair enough. Amara On 23 November 2013 03:17, Liu Xin <navy.xliu at gmail.com> wrote: > Amara, > > first, thank you for answering. but I found

> On Dec 10, 2015, at 10:49 AM, Derek Schuff <dschuff at google.com> wrote: > > > > On Thu, Dec 10, 2015 at 10:13 AM Quentin Colombet <qcolombet at apple.com <mailto:qcolombet at apple.com>> wrote: > > I am tempted to think no, we don’t, but I don’t know the use cases. > What post-RA passes with want to run with virtual regs? > > The immediate

We had some additional discussion on this. There is a lot of concern generally about post-RA passes which do not expect to have to handle virtual registers; specifically if they unexpectedly start seeing virtual registers, or if they work today but start making assumptions in the future. We discussed considering a mechanism that would require MachineFunctionPasses to "opt-in" and declare

Hi, I am trying to add Hazard scheduling nodes after buildSchedGraph(), with a scheduler derived from ScheduleDAGInstrs. I get weird errors, so I wonder what I am doing wrong? What I am doing right now is: I have a created MI with opcode HAZARD that does not have parent, and I greate a SUnit(HazardMI). I use this one HazardMI for all hazard nodes. I remove all edges using removePred. I insert

Hi Andy, The thing is that I was trying to build a sched graph in other places than these two standard scheduling passes. For instance, in pre-emit. I would like to reschedule a basic block on my vliw target just before assembly emission. I tried to add SUnits for hazards in an experiment, but this gave very weird errors... even while allocating extra space in SUnits vector. For some function, I

Thanks, that helps. The code emitter is definitely not the way you want to go about solving this problem, though. Are the instruction opcode (MachineInstr::getOpcode()) and the operand values not sufficient? All the information present in the encoding should be inferable from those, as that’s where the encoding comes from. -Jim On May 30, 2013, at 10:12 AM, Jafar J <pluck90 at

Here are 2 patches, which are independent of each other. The first splits PrologEpilogInserter into 2 parts : http://reviews.llvm.org/D16481 After looking at the code I thought it made more sense for the major split to include whether callee-saved register spills are supported. So for non-virtual targets, virtual registers are not supported and scavenging is optionally supported, and vice versa

Yes your absolutely right, the Opcode and the Operands in each machine instruction are sufficient to generate the final binary representation of the MachineInstruction but not exactly. If you take a look at the format of each MIPS instruction, you’ll see that there are some fixed bits for each instruction which are not available inside the machine instruction object –From what I saw so far-.