Displaying 9 results from an estimated 9 matches for "sibcal".
Did you mean:
sibcall
2013 Jun 24
1
[LLVMdev] DebugInfo: Missing non-trivially-copyable parameters in SelectionDAG
...test/CodeGen/X86/brcond.ll:8:10: error: expected string not found in input
; CHECK: xorb
^
<stdin>:4:9: note: scanning from here
_test1: ## @test1
^
<stdin>:7:2: note: possible intended match here
xorl 4(%esp), %eax
^
--
********************
FAIL: LLVM :: CodeGen/X86/sibcall-2.ll (31 of 51)
******************** TEST 'LLVM :: CodeGen/X86/sibcall-2.ll' FAILED ********************
Script:
--
/usr/local/google/home/blaikie/dev/llvm/build/clang/debug/bin/./llc < /usr/local/google/home/blaikie/dev/llvm/src/test/CodeGen/X86/sibcall-2.ll -mtriple=i386-apple-darwin...
2010 Feb 06
0
[LLVMdev] Removing -tailcallopt?
Evan Cheng wrote:
> As far as I can tell only PPC and X86 targets are supporting this option. Does anyone actually using it? I'd prefer to just remove it to clean up the implementation if no one has any objections.
Don't know whether that is the same, but my Pure compiler sets
llvm::PerformTailCallOpt. Pure needs TCO because it doesn't have any
built-in looping constructs. In
2010 Feb 06
2
[LLVMdev] Removing -tailcallopt?
I am somewhat surprised people are actually using TCO. I had to fixed a number of subtle bugs to get it working and even now I am not too happy with it. My focus was on finding non-ABI changing automatic tail call cases (aka gcc's sibcall). It's now done so I'll leave -tailcallopt alone for now.
I'll run -tailcallopt as x86 llcbeta to see if JIT is indeed broken.
Evan
On Feb 5, 2010, at 7:32 PM, Albert Graef wrote:
> Evan Cheng wrote:
>> As far as I can tell only PPC and X86 targets are supporting this opt...
2009 Sep 18
2
[LLVMdev] OT: intel darwin losing primary target status
...eld to bitfield,
add in_use field.
(add_cfi): Disable check redefining cfa away from drap.
(lookup_cfa_1): Add remember argument; handle remember/restore.
(lookup_cfa): Pass remember argument.
(cfa_remember): New.
(compute_barrier_args_size_1): Remove sibcall check.
(dwarf2out_frame_debug_def_cfa): New.
(dwarf2out_frame_debug_adjust_cfa): New.
(dwarf2out_frame_debug_cfa_offset): New.
(dwarf2out_frame_debug_cfa_register): New.
(dwarf2out_frame_debug_cfa_restore): New.
(dwarf2out_frame_debug): Handle REG_CF...
2009 Sep 18
0
[LLVMdev] OT: intel darwin losing primary target status
On Sep 18, 2009, at 10:43 AM, Jack Howarth wrote:
> On Fri, Sep 18, 2009 at 10:28:15AM -0700, Nick Kledzik wrote:
>> So, when these test cases are run, is the binary linked against /usr/
>> lib/libgcc_s.10.5.dylib? or against some just built libgcc_s.
>> 10.5.dylib?
>> or against some just build libgcc_s.dylib? If either of the
>> latter, then
>> if you
2009 Sep 18
4
[LLVMdev] OT: intel darwin losing primary target status
On Fri, Sep 18, 2009 at 10:28:15AM -0700, Nick Kledzik wrote:
> So, when these test cases are run, is the binary linked against /usr/
> lib/libgcc_s.10.5.dylib? or against some just built libgcc_s.10.5.dylib?
> or against some just build libgcc_s.dylib? If either of the latter, then
> if you changed the FSF build of libgcc_s for darwin to have the right
> magic symbols, then
2015 Apr 16
2
[LLVMdev] Compile SPEC2006 with clang-3.2, multi definition errors.
...p.bc obstack.bc optabs.bc params.bc
predict.bc print-rtl.bc print-tree.bc profile.bc real.bc recog.bc
reg-stack.bc regclass.bc
regmove.bc regrename.bc reload.bc reload1.bc reorg.bc resource.bc rtl.bc
rtlanal.bc rtl-error.bc sbitmap.bc sched-deps.bc sched-ebb.bc sched-rgn.bc
sched-vi
s.bc sdbout.bc sibcall.bc simplify-rtx.bc ssa.bc ssa-ccp.bc ssa-dce.bc
stmt.bc stor-layout.bc stringpool.bc timevar.bc toplev.bc tree.bc
tree-dump.bc tree-in
line.bc unroll.bc varasm.bc varray.bc vmsdbgout.bc xcoffout.bc ggc-page.bc
i386.bc xmalloc.bc xexit.bc hashtab.bc safe-ctype.bc splay-tree.bc
xstrdup.bc md5.
bc fi...
2010 Feb 05
8
[LLVMdev] Removing -tailcallopt?
Hi all,
I've added tail call optimization to x86. This is different from what -tailcallopt does, which forces fastcc function to be tail callable. My changes detect opportunities to do tail call without having to change the ABI.
I've looked at the codegen of -tailcallopt and it doesn't look all that good. Running it as a llcbeta option shows it significantly pessimize code in most
2015 Jan 11
3
[LLVMdev] [RFC] [PATCH] add tail call optimization to thumb1-only targets
...r (ARM::R12,getPointerTy());
+ }
+
// FIXME: handle tail calls differently.
unsigned CallOpc;
bool HasMinSizeAttr = MF.getFunction()->getAttributes().hasAttribute(
@@ -2000,26 +2031,6 @@
if (isCalleeStructRet || isCallerStructRet)
return false;
- // FIXME: Completely disable sibcall for Thumb1 since Thumb1RegisterInfo::
- // emitEpilogue is not ready for them. Thumb tail calls also use t2B, as
- // the Thumb1 16-bit unconditional branch doesn't have sufficient relocation
- // support in the assembler and linker to be used. This would need to be
- // fixed to fully sup...