search for: t33

...ueType:ch:i1 t23: i1 = setcc t20, Constant:i32<0>, seteq:ch t25: i32,ch = CopyFromReg t0, Register:i32 %vreg396 t28: i1 = setcc t25, Constant:i32<255>, setugt:ch t29: i1 = and t23, t28 t37: i1 = setcc t29, Constant:i1<-1>, setne:ch t33: ch = brcond t16, t37, BasicBlock:ch<if.end65.1 0x7097330> t35: ch = br t33, BasicBlock:ch<if.then64.1 0x7097280> Here we see that the settcc has been legalized to xor, which I am fine with.. Legalizing: t37: i1 = setcc t29, Constant:i1<-1>, setne:ch Combining: t37: i1 = setcc...

...onstant:i32<0>, seteq:ch >> t25: i32,ch = CopyFromReg t0, Register:i32 %vreg396 >> t28: i1 = setcc t25, Constant:i32<255>, setugt:ch >> t29: i1 = and t23, t28 >> t37: i1 = setcc t29, Constant:i1<-1>, setne:ch >> t33: ch = brcond t16, t37, BasicBlock:ch<if.end65.1 0x7097330> >> t35: ch = br t33, BasicBlock:ch<if.then64.1 0x7097280> >> Here we see that the settcc has been legalized to xor, which I am fine with.. >> Legalizing: t37: i1 = setcc t29, Constant:i1<-1>, setne:ch...

...> t25:1, GlobalAddress:i16<float* @x4> 0, undef:i16 t27: i16 = GlobalAddress<float (float, float, float, float)* @fdivfaddfmul_a> 0 t29: ch,glue = callseq_start t26:1, TargetConstant:i16<4> t31: ch,glue = CLPISD::COPY_TO_CALLEE_A t29, t23, FrameIndex:i16<0>, t29:1 t33: ch,glue = CLPISD::COPY_TO_CALLEE_A t31, t24, FrameIndex:i16<1>, t31:1 t35: ch,glue = CLPISD::COPY_TO_CALLEE_A t33, t25, FrameIndex:i16<2>, t33:1 t37: ch,glue = CLPISD::COPY_TO_CALLEE_A t35, t26, FrameIndex:i16<3>, t35:1 t39: ch,glue = CLPISD::CALLSEQ t37, TargetGlobalAddres...

...> >   t27: i16 = GlobalAddress<float (float, float, float, float)* > @fdivfaddfmul_a> 0 > >   t29: ch,glue = callseq_start t26:1, TargetConstant:i16<4> > >   t31: ch,glue = CLPISD::COPY_TO_CALLEE_A t29, t23, FrameIndex:i16<0>, > t29:1 > >   t33: ch,glue = CLPISD::COPY_TO_CALLEE_A t31, t24, FrameIndex:i16<1>, > t31:1 > >   t35: ch,glue = CLPISD::COPY_TO_CALLEE_A t33, t25, FrameIndex:i16<2>, > t33:1 > >   t37: ch,glue = CLPISD::COPY_TO_CALLEE_A t35, t26, FrameIndex:i16<3>, > t35:1 > >  ...

Hi, Is there a kind of scope mechanism in the instruction lowering pattern language in order to control where instructions are inserted or how they are later reordered during the SelectionDiag linearization? I know the glue chain that stick instructions together. But such mechanism in not provided in instruction lowering pattern. I'm facing many situations where some patterns are lowered into

...>   t27: i16 = GlobalAddress<float (float, float, float, float)* > @fdivfaddfmul_a> 0 > >   t29: ch,glue = callseq_start t26:1, TargetConstant:i16<4> > >   t31: ch,glue = CLPISD::COPY_TO_CALLEE_A t29, t23, > FrameIndex:i16<0>, > t29:1 > >   t33: ch,glue = CLPISD::COPY_TO_CALLEE_A t31, t24, > FrameIndex:i16<1>, > t31:1 > >   t35: ch,glue = CLPISD::COPY_TO_CALLEE_A t33, t25, > FrameIndex:i16<2>, > t33:1 > >   t37: ch,glue = CLPISD::COPY_TO_CALLEE_A t35, t26, > FrameIndex:i16<3>, > t35:1...

...l t19, Constant:i64<1> * t23: i8 = and t22, Constant:i8<1>* t24: i32 = zero_extend t23 t27: i1 = setcc t24, Constant:i32<1>, seteq:ch t29: i1 = xor t27, Constant:i1<-1> t31: ch = brcond t18, t29, BasicBlock:ch<if.else 0xa5f8d48> t33: ch = br t31, BasicBlock:ch<if.then 0xa5f8c98> The Optimized lowered selection DAG does not contain the* AND* node, but it does have a truncate which would seem to stand in for it given the result is only 1bit wide and the xor following it is operating on 1-bit wide values: t22: i8...

...gt; * t23: i8 = and t22, Constant:i8<1>* > t24: i32 = zero_extend t23 > t27: i1 = setcc t24, Constant:i32<1>, seteq:ch > t29: i1 = xor t27, Constant:i1<-1> > t31: ch = brcond t18, t29, BasicBlock:ch<if.else 0xa5f8d48> > t33: ch = br t31, BasicBlock:ch<if.then 0xa5f8c98> > > The Optimized lowered selection DAG does not contain the*AND* node, > but it does have a truncate which would seem to stand in for it given > the result is only 1bit wide and the xor following it is operating on > 1-bit wide...

...gt; * t23: i8 = and t22, Constant:i8<1>* > t24: i32 = zero_extend t23 > t27: i1 = setcc t24, Constant:i32<1>, seteq:ch > t29: i1 = xor t27, Constant:i1<-1> > t31: ch = brcond t18, t29, BasicBlock:ch<if.else 0xa5f8d48> > t33: ch = br t31, BasicBlock:ch<if.then 0xa5f8c98> > > The Optimized lowered selection DAG does not contain the* AND* node, but > it does have a truncate which would seem to stand in for it given the > result is only 1bit wide and the xor following it is operating on 1-bit > wide v...

...uffle<0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0> t23, undef:v8i64 t32: v8i64 = BUILD_VECTOR Constant:i64<0>, Constant:i64<-1>, Constant:i64<-2>, Constant:i64<-3>, Constant:i64<-4>, Constant:i64<-5>, Constant:i64<-6>, Constant:i64<-7> t33: v8i64 = add t24, t32 t35: ch = CopyToReg t0, Register:v8i64 %vreg17, t33 t37: ch = CopyToReg t0, Register:i64 %vreg117, Constant:i64<0> t39: ch = TokenFactor t18, t35, t37 t40: ch = br t39, BasicBlock:ch<vector.body25 0x1d07660>...

...4i32,ch = load<LD16[%0+80](align=8)(dereferenceable)> t20, t46, undef:i64 t25: ch = store<ST16[%1]> t20, t24, FrameIndex:i64<0>, undef:i64 t29: i64 = add FrameIndex:i64<0>, Constant:i64<16> t30: ch = store<ST16[%1+16]> t20, t28, t29, undef:i64 t33: i64 = add FrameIndex:i64<0>, Constant:i64<32> t34: ch = store<ST16[%1+32]> t20, t32, t33, undef:i64 t38: i64 = add FrameIndex:i64<0>, Constant:i64<48> t39: ch = store<ST16[%1+48]> t20, t37, t38, undef:i64 t43: i64 = add FrameIndex:i64<0&gt...

<div> </div><div><div><p>Carry-less multiplication[1] instructions exist (at least optionally) on many architectures: armv8, RISC-V, x86_64, POWER, SPARC, C64x, and possibly more.</p><p>This proposal is to add a <code>llvm.clmul</code> instruction. Or if that is contentious, <code>llvm.experimental.bitmanip.clmul</code> instruction.

...However, now I start getting Segfault at selection for masked_gather, the reason being that I don't have vector registers of 64-bits: ISEL: Starting pattern match on root node: t14: v128i16,ch = masked_gather<LD256[<unknown>]> t0, t22, t29, TargetConstant:i64<0>, t33 Initial Opcode index to 1692 #0 0x00007f08faa9e700 llvm::sys::PrintStackTrace(llvm::raw_ostream&) /llvm/lib/Support/Unix/Signals.inc:402:0 #1 0x00007f08faa9ea9a PrintStackTraceSignalHandler(void*) /llvm/lib/Support/Unix/Signals.inc:470:0 #2 0x00007f08faa9cb55 llvm:...

Hello. I wanted to inform that I fixed the bug from the previous email. The main reason for the bug was that I thought that the SDNode masked_gather is returning only 1 value, but it returns 2 (hence, I guess, the earlier reported, difficult to follow, error: "Assertion `New->getNumTypes() == 1"). masked_gather returns 2 values because: // SDTypeProfile -

Hi. To begin with, I have a freshly built RedHat Linux 8.0 box running samba 2.2.8a. The kernel version is 2.4.18-14. I downloaded and compiled samba from source. I am using LPRng-3.8.9-6 as my printing system. The attached printer is a Lexmark Z22 printer and it is attached to the parralel port. Problem: For the life of me, I can't get NT type clients, NT4, 2K and XP to print to samba.