search for: resultvals

Displaying 10 results from an estimated 10 matches for "resultvals".

Did you mean: resultval
2009 Nov 13
3
[LLVMdev] legalize dag problem
....getNode()) { Tmp3 = LegalizeOp(Tmp1); Tmp4 = LegalizeOp(Tmp1.getValue(1)); <----------------- what is the value expected } What is the value supposed to legalized by the second call to legalizeOp. ? My problem is that the second call asserts inside legalize ops at ResultVals[Op.getResNo()]; b'cos ResultVals has only 1 element and Op.resno is 0. I am not sure if I provided enough context. Please let me know if more information is needed. thanks shrey
2009 Nov 13
0
[LLVMdev] legalize dag problem
> My problem is that the second call asserts inside legalize ops at > ResultVals[Op.getResNo()]; b'cos ResultVals has only 1 element and > Op.resno is 0. Looks like you lowered the load improperly. It should return 2 values: the value loaded and a chain. -- With best regards, Anton Korobeynikov Faculty of Mathematics and Mechanics, Saint Petersburg State University
2009 Nov 13
1
[LLVMdev] legalize dag problem
...oad->getOperand(1), load->getBasePtr(), des }; DAG.getNode(CustomOpc, NodeTys, Ops, 4); thanks again! shrey On Thu, Nov 12, 2009 at 4:41 PM, Anton Korobeynikov <anton at korobeynikov.info> wrote: >> My problem is that the second call asserts inside legalize ops at >> ResultVals[Op.getResNo()]; b'cos ResultVals has only 1 element and >> Op.resno is 0. > Looks like you lowered the load improperly. It should return 2 values: > the value loaded and a chain. > > -- > With best regards, Anton Korobeynikov > Faculty of Mathematics and Mechanics, Saint...
2015 Jan 26
2
[LLVMdev] RFC: Native Windows C++ exception handling
I am working on adding support for C++ exception handling when compiling for a native Windows target (that is a target with "MSVC" specified as the environment). Because of differences between how the native Windows runtime handles exceptions and the Itanium-based model used by current LLVM exception handling code, I believe this will require some extensions to the LLVM IR, though
2012 Mar 03
0
removing data look-ahead, something faster.
Hello, Thank you for your help/advice! The issue here is speed/efficiency. I can do what I want, but its really slow. The goal is to have the ability to do calculations on my data and have it adjusted for look-ahead. I see two ways to do this: (I'm open to more ideas. My terminology: Unadjusted = values not adjusted for look-ahead bias; adjusted = values adjusted for look-ahead bias.) 1) I
2012 Mar 05
1
index instead of loop?
Hello, Does anyone know of a way I can speed this up? Basically I'm attempting to get the data item on the same row as the report date for each report date available. In reality, I have over 11k of columns, not just A, B, C, D and I have to do that over 100 times. My solution is slow, but it works. The loop is slow because of merge. # create sample data z.dates =
2015 Jan 27
2
[LLVMdev] RFC: Native Windows C++ exception handling
Hi Reid, Thanks for the input. You wrote: > The @_Z4testv.unwind.1 helper just calls ~Inner(), but not ~Outer. That’s actually intentional. The thing to keep in mind is that all of the landing pads are going to be effectively removed by the time the final object image is generated. They are just there to facilitate the table generation, and in the __CxxFrameHandler3 case they don’t mean
2017 Jan 23
2
returning from LowerOperation()
> On Jan 23, 2017, at 12:36, Friedman, Eli via llvm-dev <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: > > On 1/23/2017 5:21 AM, Jonas Paulsson wrote: >> Hi Eli, >> >> I would like to clarify generally what the difference is between returning SDValue() and Op (input argument unchanged) from LowerOperation()? >> >> My understanding is that returning SDValue()
2012 Jan 11
0
[LLVMdev] landingpad instruction documentation is vague
Hi Yuri, > I am new to the landingpad (which is relatively new too). > Documentation http://llvm.org/docs/LangRef.html#i_landingpad leaves some > questions open: > > 1. What happens when actual exception type isn't listed in catch or > filter clauses? Does it still return the corresponding structure like if > it was listed? Or behavior is undefined? if it doesn't
2012 Jan 10
3
[LLVMdev] landingpad instruction documentation is vague
I am new to the landingpad (which is relatively new too). Documentation http://llvm.org/docs/LangRef.html#i_landingpad leaves some questions open: 1. What happens when actual exception type isn't listed in catch or filter clauses? Does it still return the corresponding structure like if it was listed? Or behavior is undefined? 2. What is 'somety'? Shouldn't it maybe say