search for: ptr256

...ortunately. If it would help, one of the changes that we’ve made is to add separate PTRADD, INTTOPTR and PTRTOINT nodes to SelectionDAG, which makes it possible to keep pointer types distinct. We currently have an iFATPTR type, which is not ideal - we’d like to replace this with a set of PTR32 to PTR256 types. I’d be happy to prioritise extracting these patches for upstreaming if that would be useful to others. David

Hi, I recently started helping with the LLVM AVR backend [1]. The AVR is an 8 bit core with pointer type i16. That makes pointers illegal in the SelectionDAG. As far as I understand it, it is the backends job to legalize these nodes by using the ReplaceNodeResults/LowerOperation callbacks. Is that about right? I have the feeling that the symbolic nodes carrying pointers, like FrameIndex are

Hello all, I would like to propose a large change to LLVM that I would be happy to implement. The instruction selection legalizer knows of three different ways to legalize an action (ignoring an already legal action). - Expansion - Promotion - Custom Expanding a node will lead to one of two things - the operation will be split into several equivalent smaller operations (i.e. 64-bit