search for: quert

...LLVM without either decompiling to MI, or rewriting those interfaces to be based on MC. I think you have to pick one direction or the other. You are right those are the two choices. Given that the actual data is in MCSchedModel and TargetSchedModel mostly being interested in the MCInstrDesc you can quert from an MI it seemed to me like the easier/cleaner route to not build up MI datastructures but stay with MC specific things. You are right though that there is a whole bunch of callbacks in TargetInstrInfo that would need alternatives if we want to go this route. Indeed building up MI makes things...

...without either decompiling to MI, or rewriting those interfaces to be based on MC. I think you have to pick one direction or the other. > You are right those are the two choices. Given that the actual data is in MCSchedModel and TargetSchedModel mostly being interested in the MCInstrDesc you can quert from an MI it seemed to me like the easier/cleaner route to not build up MI datastructures but stay with MC specific things. > You are right though that there is a whole bunch of callbacks in TargetInstrInfo that would need alternatives if we want to go this route. Indeed building up MI makes th...

> On Mar 5, 2018, at 3:38 PM, Quentin Colombet <qcolombet at apple.com> wrote: > > When Ahmed and I worked on the decompiler, we first targeted MC. Going to MI was more difficult and really wouldn’t have gotten us a lot of benefits. Instead, Ahmed pushed for directly decompiling to IR (look for dagger). Thanks for the pointer Quentin. > I would actually be in favor for more

Thanks Andrea for working on this! I’ve been willing to do this for quite some time now. Looks like procrastination was the right approach here ;). > On Mar 2, 2018, at 9:33 AM, Andrew Trick via llvm-dev <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: > > +Ahmed > >> On Mar 2, 2018, at 6:42 AM, Andrea Di Biagio <andrea.dibiagio at gmail.com <mailto:andrea.dibiagio at

...g to MI, > or rewriting those interfaces to be based on MC. I think you have to pick > one direction or the other. > > You are right those are the two choices. Given that the actual data is in > MCSchedModel and TargetSchedModel mostly being interested in the > MCInstrDesc you can quert from an MI it seemed to me like the > easier/cleaner route to not build up MI datastructures but stay with MC > specific things. > You are right though that there is a whole bunch of callbacks in > TargetInstrInfo that would need alternatives if we want to go this route. > Indeed bui...