Displaying 3 results from an estimated 3 matches for "stdw".
Did you mean:
std
2011 Oct 27
1
[LLVMdev] Trunc Load
> This is contradictory: on a little-endian processor, the address for
> loading a 64-bit value is same as the address of the low word. Are
> you sure you're modeling the semantics of your lddw and stddw
> instructions correctly?
... I thought so until now. Because I implemented stdw (store
doubleword) completely analogous to lddw: Just print out stdw with the
given pointer and the register pair, just like lddw. (This seems obvious.)
Well, ****. I just read the documentation very carefully (yeah I know.
I'm sorry) and it seems that stdw doesn't care about the big/li...
2011 Oct 27
0
[LLVMdev] Trunc Load
On Thu, Oct 27, 2011 at 9:29 AM, Johannes Birgmeier
<e0902998 at student.tuwien.ac.at> wrote:
>
>> Hi Johannes, what processor are you targeting? Is it little-endian or
>> big-endian?
> Little-endian. (The truth: you can set it manually, but it is set to
> little endian, for sure.) The processor is a TI TMS320C64x.
>
> Follow-up: I discovered that the
2011 Oct 27
2
[LLVMdev] Trunc Load
> Hi Johannes, what processor are you targeting? Is it little-endian or
> big-endian?
Little-endian. (The truth: you can set it manually, but it is set to
little endian, for sure.) The processor is a TI TMS320C64x.
Follow-up: I discovered that the "guilty" method is
DAGCombiner::ReduceLoadWidth. The error is introduced because the offset
is not calculated correctly.
The first