search for: tfi

...a87 100644 --- a/lib/CodeGen/StackSegmenter.cpp +++ b/lib/CodeGen/StackSegmenter.cpp @@ -40,7 +40,10 @@ void StackSegmenter::getAnalysisUsage(AnalysisUsage &info) const { } bool StackSegmenter::runOnMachineFunction(MachineFunction &MF) { - return false; + const TargetFrameLowering &TFI = *MF.getTarget().getFrameLowering(); + TFI.adjustForSegmentedStacks(MF); + // adjustForSegmentedStacks always changes the MachineFunction + return true; } FunctionPass *llvm::createStackSegmenter() { -- Sanjoy Das http://playingwithpointers.com

...// need to track the SP adjustment for frame index elimination. if (TFI->canSimplifyCallFramePseudos(Fn)) => TFI->eliminateCallFramePseudoInstr(Fn, *I->getParent(), I); Perhaps there is a bug in canSimplifyCallFramePseudos? Evan On Sep 26, 2013, at 12:00 PM, Krzysztof Parzyszek <kparzysz at codeaurora.org> wrote: > Consider this example: &gt...

...hine &TM = Fn.getTarget(); assert(TM.getRegisterInfo() && "TM::getRegisterInfo() must be implemented!"); const TargetInstrInfo &TII = *Fn.getTarget().getInstrInfo(); const TargetRegisterInfo &TRI = *TM.getRegisterInfo(); const TargetFrameLowering *TFI = TM.getFrameLowering(); bool StackGrowsDown = TFI->getStackGrowthDirection() == TargetFrameLowering::StackGrowsDown; int FrameSetupOpcode = TII.getCallFrameSetupOpcode(); int FrameDestroyOpcode = TII.getCallFrameDestroyOpcode(); if (RS && !FrameIndex...

...= DVInsn->getOperand(0); const TargetRegisterInfo *TRI = Asm->TM.getRegisterInfo(); if (DVInsn->getOperand(1).isImm() && TRI->getFrameRegister(*Asm->MF) == RegOp.getReg()) { unsigned FrameReg = 0; const TargetFrameLowering *TFI = Asm->TM.getFrameLowering(); int Offset = TFI->getFrameIndexReference(*Asm->MF, DVInsn->getOperand(1).getImm(), FrameReg); MachineLocation Location(FrameReg, Offset);...

...s are not being included as part of the stack frame, and > // the target doesn't indicate otherwise, remove the call frame pseudos > // here. The sub/add sp instruction pairs are still inserted, but we don't > // need to track the SP adjustment for frame index elimination. > if (TFI->canSimplifyCallFramePseudos(Fn)) > => TFI->eliminateCallFramePseudoInstr(Fn, *I->getParent(), I); > > Perhaps there is a bug in canSimplifyCallFramePseudos? > > Evan > > On Sep 26, 2013, at 12:00 PM, Krzysztof Parzyszek > <kparzysz at codeaurora.org <ma...

...> assert(TM.getRegisterInfo() && >> "TM::getRegisterInfo() must be implemented!"); >> const TargetInstrInfo &TII = *Fn.getTarget().getInstrInfo(); >> const TargetRegisterInfo &TRI = *TM.getRegisterInfo(); >> const TargetFrameLowering *TFI = TM.getFrameLowering(); >> bool StackGrowsDown = >> TFI->getStackGrowthDirection() == >> TargetFrameLowering::StackGrowsDown; >> int FrameSetupOpcode = TII.getCallFrameSetupOpcode(); >> int FrameDestroyOpcode = TII.getCallFrameDestroyOpcode()...

...works. > if (!RegInfo->targetHandlesStackFrameRounding() && > (FFI->hasCalls() || FFI->hasVarSizedObjects() || > - RegInfo->needsStackRealignment(Fn))) { > + (RegInfo->needsStackRealignment(Fn) && > + Offset > std::abs(TFI.getOffsetOfLocalArea())))) { > // If we have reserved argument space for call sites in the > function > // immediately on entry to the current function, count it as > part of the > // overall stack size. > > _______________________________________________...

...= MFI->CreateStackObject(RC->getSize(), Align, true); This will create unaligned load/store for a callee-saved 128-bit register on the frame slot because StackAlign is 4. Adding a check for stack realignable or putting all the 128-bit registers as caller-save will fix the problem. if (!TFI->isStackRealignable()) <--- new line Align = std::min(Align, StackAlign); Is this a bug or am I missing something? Thanks, Francois Pichet, Octasic. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/attac...

...a callee-saved 128-bit > > > register on the frame slot because StackAlign is 4. > > > > > > > > > Adding a check for stack realignable or putting all the 128-bit > > > registers as caller-save will fix the problem. > > > > > > if (!TFI->isStackRealignable()) <--- new line > > > Align = std::min(Align, StackAlign); > > > > > > Is this a bug or am I missing something? > > > > > > > This looks like a bug. By default, isStackRealignable() always > > returns true (this def...

...are put into a new node TF2 and so on. That is, each generated TF contains a previous TF as its first operand and a bunch of pending loads: ___TF2______ / | \ TF1 LD2.1 .. LD2.64 / \ LD1.1..LD1.64 2) Every 64 loads are put into a new TF node TFi. Then all such TFs are put into a big parent TF, that has only these TFi nodes as operands: _____TF______ / \ TF1 ... __TFk__ / \ / \ LD1.1..LD1.64 LDk.1...LDk.64 These changes (a) and (b) significantely redu...

...Fn.getTarget(); > assert(TM.getRegisterInfo() && > "TM::getRegisterInfo() must be implemented!"); > const TargetInstrInfo &TII = *Fn.getTarget().getInstrInfo(); > const TargetRegisterInfo &TRI = *TM.getRegisterInfo(); > const TargetFrameLowering *TFI = TM.getFrameLowering(); > bool StackGrowsDown = > TFI->getStackGrowthDirection() == > TargetFrameLowering::StackGrowsDown; > int FrameSetupOpcode = TII.getCallFrameSetupOpcode(); > int FrameDestroyOpcode = TII.getCallFrameDestroyOpcode(); > > if (RS...

On Aug 23, 2011, at 9:24 AM, Sanjoy Das wrote: > Hi! > >> diff --git a/lib/CodeGen/StackSegmenter.cpp b/lib/CodeGen/StackSegmenter.cpp >> new file mode 100644 >> index 0000000..5ffb8f2 >> --- /dev/null >> +++ b/lib/CodeGen/StackSegmenter.cpp >> @@ -0,0 +1,48 @@ >> +//===-- StackSegmenter.h - Prolog/Epilog code insertion -------*- C++ -* --===//

...@ -464,7 +464,8 @@ // works. if (!RegInfo->targetHandlesStackFrameRounding() && (FFI->hasCalls() || FFI->hasVarSizedObjects() || - RegInfo->needsStackRealignment(Fn))) { + (RegInfo->needsStackRealignment(Fn) && + Offset > std::abs(TFI.getOffsetOfLocalArea())))) { // If we have reserved argument space for call sites in the function // immediately on entry to the current function, count it as part of the // overall stack size.

Mehdi, I am perusing the 3.8 trunk sources, and don’t find evidence where I would expect it for LLVM “downgrading” a function’s calling convention. PrologEpilogEmitter() { “CodeGen/” ... TFI->determineCalleeSaves() { “Target/XYZ/” TargetFrameLowering::determineCalleeSaves() { “CodeGen/” Return <<< some object derived from “*CallingConv.td” >>>; “build/lib/Target/XYX/” } ... SavedRegs.set(Reg);...

Hi! > diff --git a/lib/CodeGen/StackSegmenter.cpp b/lib/CodeGen/StackSegmenter.cpp > new file mode 100644 > index 0000000..5ffb8f2 > --- /dev/null > +++ b/lib/CodeGen/StackSegmenter.cpp > @@ -0,0 +1,48 @@ > +//===-- StackSegmenter.h - Prolog/Epilog code insertion -------*- C++ -* --===// > > The comment is obviously incorrect. Thanks. So much for lifting file

On Oct 10, 2011, at 10:26 AM, Richard Osborne wrote: > I'm investigating a bug associated with debug information that manifests > itself in the XCore backend (PR11105). I'd like to understand what the > expected behavior of eliminateFrameIndex() is when it is called on a > dbg_value machine instruction. That is up to the target. The TII::emitFrameIndexDebugValue() hook is

Running on x86-64 linux: FAIL: test/CodeGen/X86/vec_ins_extract.ll Failed with exit(1) at line 1 while running: llvm-as < test/CodeGen/X86/vec_ins_extract.ll | opt -scalarrepl -instcombine | llc -march=x86 -mcpu=yonah | not grep sub.*esp subl $16, %esp subl $16, %esp subl $16, %esp subl $16, %esp child process exited abnormally FAIL:

...if (!RegInfo->targetHandlesStackFrameRounding() && >> (FFI->hasCalls() || FFI->hasVarSizedObjects() || >> - RegInfo->needsStackRealignment(Fn))) { >> + (RegInfo->needsStackRealignment(Fn) && >> + Offset > std::abs(TFI.getOffsetOfLocalArea())))) { >> // If we have reserved argument space for call sites in the >> function >> // immediately on entry to the current function, count it as >> part of the >> // overall stack size. >> >> ___________________________...

...argetHandlesStackFrameRounding() && > >> (FFI->hasCalls() || FFI->hasVarSizedObjects() || > >> - RegInfo->needsStackRealignment(Fn))) { > >> + (RegInfo->needsStackRealignment(Fn) && > >> + Offset > std::abs(TFI.getOffsetOfLocalArea())))) { > >> // If we have reserved argument space for call sites in the > >> function > >> // immediately on entry to the current function, count it as > >> part of the > >> // overall stack size. > >> > &...

...btarget>(); if (Subtarget.is64Bit()) return X86_GR8_AO_64; else return begin(); } GR8Class::iterator GR8Class::allocation_order_end(const MachineFunction &MF) const { const TargetMachine &TM = MF.getTarget(); const TargetFrameLowering *TFI = TM.getFrameLowering(); const X86Subtarget &Subtarget = TM.getSubtarget<X86Subtarget>(); const X86MachineFunctionInfo *MFI = MF.getInfo<X86MachineFunctionInfo>(); // Does the function dedicate RBP / EBP to being a frame ptr? if (!Subtarget.is64Bit())...