search for: setl

what's the semantics for setCC if one of the operands is NULL pointer? %ptr=alloc int seteq int*, %pt, NULL what's the result for the second instruction? How about setne, setlt, setgt, setle, and setge? Thanks! Jianzhong

Before I file a bug, I thought I'd check to make sure something hasn't changed. Stacker used to work in 1.2, now it fails on six tests. All six tests pertain to use of the SetLT, SetGT, SetLE, and SetGE SetCondInst. In my test programs they all fail, regardless of the values. The *only* thing I've done to Stacker is to change the base type involved in the comparison from int to long. Is there something "different" about the comparison of longs? The code ge...

Hi all, the small test modeling my problem is attached. (see comments in file attached) the problem is that both SetCondInst* CondInst = new SetCondInst( Instruction::SetLE, One, Two ); and SetCondInst* CondInst = new SetCondInst( Instruction::SetLE, Two, One ); have the same output... Anyone have a sharper eye?.. --- Valery A.Khamenya -------------- next part -------------- An embedded and charset-unspecified text was scrubbed... Name: condition.cpp...

...sign: # @llsign xor ecx, ecx | xor edx, edx mov eax, dword ptr [esp + 8] | mov eax, dword ptr [esp + 8] cmp ecx, dword ptr [esp + 4] | cmp edx, dword ptr [esp + 4] sbb ecx, eax | sbb edx, eax setl cl | cdq sar eax, 31 | setl al movzx ecx, cl | movzx eax, al add eax, ecx | add eax, edx mov edx, eax | ret sar edx, 31 ret NO...

On Sun, 9 May 2004, Reid Spencer wrote: > Before I file a bug, I thought I'd check to make sure something hasn't > changed. Stacker used to work in 1.2, now it fails on six tests. All six > tests pertain to use of the SetLT, SetGT, SetLE, and SetGE SetCondInst. > In my test programs they all fail, regardless of the values. > > The *only* thing I've done to Stacker is to change the base type > involved in the comparison from int to long. Is there something > "different" about the compariso...

On Wed, 18 Aug 2004, Valery A.Khamenya wrote: > the example attached I have used to prove that JIT and some visible > optimizations are really invoked. > > Proved OK. I got 30% speed-up in comparison to gcc 3.3.3 > on my Athlon XP 1500. Cool! Hey Valery, before we add this to the CVS repo, can you take a look at some of the changes I made to your HowToUseJIT example and

...ed)b; int cond = a > 0; int check = *s > b; return (cond & !check) | (!cond & check); } Assembly: saddo_native: # @saddo_native xor eax, eax add edi, esi seto al mov dword ptr [rdx], edi ret saddo_portable: # @saddo_portable lea eax, [rsi + rdi] mov dword ptr [rdx], eax cmp eax, esi setle al setg cl test edi, edi jg .LBB3_2 mov eax, ecx .LBB3_2: movzx eax, al ret saddo_portable2: # @saddo_portable2 lea eax, [rsi + rdi] mov dword ptr [rdx], eax test edi, edi setg cl cmp eax, esi setg al xor al, cl movzx eax, al ret Do you know the trick to force the compiler to use the seto instru...

...behaves differently for factors, for example. However, "MAY provide" is a bit scary, and it doesn't say WHAT the difference in behaviour is. I must say that "is.na(x) <- ..." is rather repugnant, because it doesn't work. What do I mean? Well, as the designers of SETL who many years ago coined the term "sinister function call" to talk about f(...)<-..., pointed out, if you do f(x) <- y then afterwards you expect f(x) == y to be true. So let's try it: > x <- c(1,NA,3) > is.na(x) <- c(FALSE,FALSE,TRUE) > x...

Hi LLVMers, the example attached I have used to prove that JIT and some visible optimizations are really invoked. Proved OK. I got 30% speed-up in comparison to gcc 3.3.3 on my Athlon XP 1500. Nice. P.S. guys, no fears, I don't plan to flood the cvs repository with my "brilliant" examples ;) --- Valery A.Khamenya -------------- next part -------------- An

..._parami$[esp-4] ; 10 : { ; 11 : varx = parami; ; 12 : vary = 0; ; 13 : } ; 14 : else ; 15 : { ; 16 : varx = 0; ; 17 : vary = paraml; ; 18 : } ; 19 : for( nI = 1 ; nI <= paraml; nI++) mov edx, DWORD PTR _paraml$[esp-4] xor eax, eax test ecx, ecx setle al sub eax, 1 and eax, ecx cmp edx, 1 jl SHORT $LN3 at TESTE add ecx, 1 imul ecx, edx add eax, ecx $LN3 at TESTE: ; 20 : { ; 21 : varx = varx + parami + 1 ; ; 22 : vary = varx + nI; ; 23 : } ; 24 : ; 25 : return varx ; ; 26 : } ret 0 _TESTE ENDP _TEXT ENDS Run...

...nclude "llvm_c.h" /* Everything takes and recieves void * pointers. This to avoid redefining C++ types. This is the C 'version' of the Fib example, at least in spirit. */ char* fib_function = "int %fib (int %AnArg) {" " EntryBlock: " " %cond = setle int AnArg, 2" " branch bool %cond, label return, label recur" " return:" " ret int 1" " recur:" " %sub1 = sub int %AnArg, 1" " %fibx1 = call tail int %fib (int %sub1) " " %sub2 = sub int %AnArg, 2" " %fibx2 =...

...ar * countdown_function = "int %countdown (int %AnArg) {\n" " %result = call fastcc int %foo-int (int %AnArg) \n" " ret int %result\n" "}\n" "fastcc int %foo-int (int %AnArg) {\n" "EntryBlock:\n" " %cond = setle int %AnArg, 2\n" " br bool %cond, label %return, label %recur\n" "return:\n" " ret int 1\n" "recur:\n" " %sub1 = sub int %AnArg, 1\n" " %result = tail call fastcc int %foo-int (int %sub1)\n" " re...

...case ISD::SETEQ: case ISD::SETOEQ: CondCode = XXXCC::COND_E; break; case ISD::SETGT: case ISD::SETOGT: CondCode = XXXCC::COND_GT; break; case ISD::SETGE: case ISD::SETOGE: CondCode = XXXCC::COND_GE; break; case ISD::SETOLT: case ISD::SETLT: CondCode = XXXCC::COND_LT; break; case ISD::SETOLE: case ISD::SETLE: CondCode = XXXCC::COND_LE; break; case ISD::SETONE: case ISD::SETNE: CondCode = XXXCC::COND_NE; break; case ISD::SETUO: CondCode = XXXCC::COND_UN; break; ca...

This post is related to the following post http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/2016-April/098823.html I'm still trying to compile a library with clang. But now I'm getting as assert in lib/CodeGen/TargetLoweringBase.cpp:1155: virtual llvm::EVT llvm::TargetLoweringBase::getSetCCResultType(llvm::LLVMContext&, llvm::EVT) const: Assertion `!VT.isVector() && "No default

...= XXXCC::COND_E; > break; > case ISD::SETGT: > case ISD::SETOGT: > CondCode = XXXCC::COND_GT; > break; > case ISD::SETGE: > case ISD::SETOGE: > CondCode = XXXCC::COND_GE; > break; > case ISD::SETOLT: > case ISD::SETLT: > CondCode = XXXCC::COND_LT; > break; > case ISD::SETOLE: > case ISD::SETLE: > CondCode = XXXCC::COND_LE; > break; > case ISD::SETONE: > case ISD::SETNE: > CondCode = XXXCC::COND_NE; > break; > case ISD::SETU...

Hi, I saw a post you made on a forum quite some time ago about booting linux off a USB drive with compatible bios via ISOlinux. I'm currently trying to do the same thing and keep running into problems with my initrd. This is probably caused by the fact that I don't really know what I'm doing! I was wondering if you found any useful info on the net you could point me in the

...ke sure there's an arg > > > > Argument &ArgX = FibF->afront(); // Get the arg > > ArgX.setName("AnArg"); // Give it a nice symbolic name for fun. > > > > SetCondInst* CondInst > > = new SetCondInst( Instruction::SetLE, > > &ArgX, Two ); > > > > BB->getInstList().push_back(CondInst); > > > > // Create the true_block > > BasicBlock* true_bb = new BasicBlock("arg<=2"); > > > > > > // Create the return instruction and add...

...these if you assume that NULL is zero and alloca returns an unsigned nonzero pointer value. > what's the semantics for setCC if one of the operands is NULL pointer? > %ptr=alloc int > seteq int*, %pt, NULL > > what's the result for the second instruction? How about setne, setlt, > setgt, setle, and setge? Thanks! > > Jianzhong > > _______________________________________________ > LLVM Developers mailing list > LLVMdev at cs.uiuc.edu http://llvm.cs.uiuc.edu > http://mail.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/llvmdev -- gaeke at uiuc.edu

On Sun, 2004-05-09 at 15:25, Chris Lattner wrote: > That sounds like a bug. I'll look into it. I assume you are seeing this > problem with the X86 backend? > Yes. > > Perhaps the cast from bool to long doesn't work the same as for bool > > to int? Should it? > > Yes, you should get a long 0 or 1. That's what I thought. > Please do, I'll also

...!= FibF->aend()); // Make sure there's an arg > > Argument &ArgX = FibF->afront(); // Get the arg > ArgX.setName("AnArg"); // Give it a nice symbolic name for fun. > > SetCondInst* CondInst > = new SetCondInst( Instruction::SetLE, > &ArgX, Two ); > > BB->getInstList().push_back(CondInst); > > // Create the true_block > BasicBlock* true_bb = new BasicBlock("arg<=2"); > > > // Create the return instruction and add it > // to the basic block for t...