search for: vreg29

Displaying 20 results from an estimated 27 matches for "vreg29".

Did you mean: vreg2
2017 Feb 02
3
Register allocator behaves differently when compiling with and without -g
...cator, the code is identical when compiling with and without -g (with the exception of " DBG_VALUE" instructions). The only difference I can see is the value assigned to the slot index for each instruction. As an example, without -g a snippet of a basic block looks like this: 32B %vreg29<def> = LDImm 1; REG1:%vreg29 36B %vreg44<def> = LDImm 1103515245; REG1:%vreg44 40B %vreg143:vsub32_1<def,read-undef> = LDImm 0; REG2:%vreg143 44B %vreg68<def> = LDImm 12345; REG1:%vreg68 64B %vreg143:vsub32_0<def> = COPY %vreg143:vsub32_1; R...
2017 Feb 02
2
Register allocator behaves differently when compiling with and without -g
...e code is identical when compiling with and without -g (with the exception of "DBG_VALUE" instructions). The only difference I can see is the value assigned to the slot index for each instruction. As an example, without -g a snippet of a basic block looks like this: > > 32B %vreg29<def> = LDImm 1; REG1:%vreg29 > 36B %vreg44<def> = LDImm 1103515245; REG1:%vreg44 > 40B %vreg143:vsub32_1<def,read-undef> = LDImm 0; REG2:%vreg143 > 44B %vreg68<def> = LDImm 12345; REG1:%vreg68 > 64B %vreg143:vsub32_0<def> = COPY...
2017 Feb 02
2
Register allocator behaves differently when compiling with and without -g
...e code is identical when compiling with and without -g (with the exception of "DBG_VALUE" instructions). The only difference I can see is the value assigned to the slot index for each instruction. As an example, without -g a snippet of a basic block looks like this: > > 32B %vreg29<def> = LDImm 1; REG1:%vreg29 > 36B %vreg44<def> = LDImm 1103515245; REG1:%vreg44 > 40B %vreg143:vsub32_1<def,read-undef> = LDImm 0; REG2:%vreg143 > 44B %vreg68<def> = LDImm 12345; REG1:%vreg68 > 64B %vreg143:vsub32_0<def> = COPY...
2011 May 02
2
[LLVMdev] LiveVariables not updated in MachineBasicBlock::SplitCriticalEdge?
...rtion `BI.FirstUse >= Start' failed. The following is the Machine IR and LiveVariables::ValInfo dump before and after PHI nodes elimination. 1. Before PHI nodes elimination. -Machine IR: BB#14: derived from LLVM BB %for.cond151.preheader Predecessors according to CFG: BB#12 BB#13 %vreg29<def> = PHI %vreg25, <BB#12>, %vreg28, <BB#13>; CPURegs:%vreg29,%vreg25,%vreg28 %vreg30<def> = PHI %vreg26, <BB#12>, %vreg27, <BB#13>; CPURegs:%vreg30,%vreg26,%vreg27 BNE %vreg81<kill>, %ZERO, <BB#17>; CPURegs:%vreg81 J <BB#15> Su...
2012 Aug 28
5
[LLVMdev] Assert in LiveInterval update
...fi#-2>, 0; mem:LD4[FixedStack-2] IntRegs:%vreg31 24B %vreg26<def> = COPY %R0<kill>; IntRegs:%vreg26 28B %vreg106<def> = TFRI 16777216; IntRegs:%vreg106<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<< CurrentTop 32B %vreg29<def> = COPY %D2<kill>; DoubleRegs:%vreg29 48B %vreg28<def> = COPY %D1<kill>; DoubleRegs:%vreg28 <<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<< Needs to move above 28B 9...
2012 Aug 30
0
[LLVMdev] Assert in LiveInterval update
...gt; 24B %vreg26<def> = COPY %R0<kill>; IntRegs:%vreg26 > 28B %vreg106<def> = TFRI 16777216; > IntRegs:%vreg106<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<< CurrentTop > 32B %vreg29<def> = COPY %D2<kill>; DoubleRegs:%vreg29 > 48B %vreg28<def> = COPY %D1<kill>; DoubleRegs:%vreg28 > <<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<< Need...
2012 Oct 24
3
[LLVMdev] RegisterCoalescing Pass seems to ignore part of CFG.
...%vreg13    Successors according to CFG: BB#1 // LOOP CONDITION 464B%vreg5<def> = COPY %vreg47<kill>; R600_Reg32:%vreg5,%vreg47 480B%vreg6<def> = COPY %vreg48<kill>; R600_Reg128:%vreg6,%vreg48 496B%vreg7<def> = COPY %vreg49<kill>; R600_Reg32:%vreg7,%vreg49 512B%vreg29<def> = SETGT_INT 0, 0, 1, 0, 0, 0, %vreg0, 0, 0, 0, %vreg7, 0, 0, 0, 1, pred:%PRED_SEL_OFF, 0; R600_Reg32:%vreg29,%vreg0,%vreg7 528B%vreg30<def> = COPY %vreg29<kill>; R600_Reg32:%vreg30,%vreg29 544B%PREDICATE_BIT<def> = PRED_X %vreg30<kill>, 152, 16; R600_Reg32:%vreg30...
2012 Aug 31
2
[LLVMdev] Assert in LiveInterval update
...2] IntRegs:%vreg31 24B %vreg26<def> = COPY %R0<kill>; IntRegs:%vreg26 28B %vreg106<def> = TFRI 16777216; IntRegs:%vreg106<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<< CurrentTop 32B %vreg29<def> = COPY %D2<kill>; DoubleRegs:%vreg29 48B %vreg28<def> = COPY %D1<kill>; DoubleRegs:%vreg28 <<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<< Needs to move...
2012 Aug 30
0
[LLVMdev] MC Register mapping question (MCRegUnitIterator )
On Aug 30, 2012, at 1:20 PM, Arnold Schwaighofer <arnolds at codeaurora.org> wrote: > The code in collectRanges() does: > > // Collect ranges for register units. These live ranges are computed on > // demand, so just skip any that haven't been computed yet. > if (TargetRegisterInfo::isPhysicalRegister(Reg)) { > for (MCRegUnitIterator Units(Reg,
2012 Oct 25
0
[LLVMdev] RegisterCoalescing Pass seems to ignore part of CFG.
...to CFG: BB#1 > > > // LOOP CONDITION > 464B%vreg5<def> = COPY %vreg47<kill>; R600_Reg32:%vreg5,%vreg47 > 480B%vreg6<def> = COPY %vreg48<kill>; R600_Reg128:%vreg6,%vreg48 > 496B%vreg7<def> = COPY %vreg49<kill>; R600_Reg32:%vreg7,%vreg49 > 512B%vreg29<def> = SETGT_INT 0, 0, 1, 0, 0, 0, %vreg0, 0, 0, 0, %vreg7, 0, 0, 0, 1, pred:%PRED_SEL_OFF, 0; R600_Reg32:%vreg29,%vreg0,%vreg7 > 528B%vreg30<def> = COPY %vreg29<kill>; R600_Reg32:%vreg30,%vreg29 > 544B%PREDICATE_BIT<def> = PRED_X %vreg30<kill>, 152, 16; R600_Reg...
2012 Aug 30
0
[LLVMdev] MC Register mapping question (MCRegUnitIterator )
...edStack-2] > IntRegs:%vreg31 > 24B %vreg26<def> = COPY %R0<kill>; IntRegs:%vreg26 > 28B %vreg106<def> = TFRI 16777216; > IntRegs:%vreg106<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<< CurrentTop > 32B %vreg29<def> = COPY %D2<kill>; DoubleRegs:%vreg29 > 48B %vreg28<def> = COPY %D1<kill>; DoubleRegs:%vreg28 > <<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<< Needs to move a...
2012 Aug 30
2
[LLVMdev] MC Register mapping question (MCRegUnitIterator )
The code in collectRanges() does: // Collect ranges for register units. These live ranges are computed on // demand, so just skip any that haven't been computed yet. if (TargetRegisterInfo::isPhysicalRegister(Reg)) { for (MCRegUnitIterator Units(Reg, &TRI); Units.isValid(); ++Units) if (LiveInterval *LI = LIS.getCachedRegUnit(*Units))
2012 Aug 31
0
[LLVMdev] Assert in LiveInterval update
...2] IntRegs:%vreg31 24B %vreg26<def> = COPY %R0<kill>; IntRegs:%vreg26 28B %vreg106<def> = TFRI 16777216; IntRegs:%vreg106<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<< CurrentTop 32B %vreg29<def> = COPY %D2<kill>; DoubleRegs:%vreg29 48B %vreg28<def> = COPY %D1<kill>; DoubleRegs:%vreg28 <<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<< Needs to move...
2012 Aug 30
2
[LLVMdev] MC Register mapping question (MCRegUnitIterator )
...B %vreg26<def> = COPY %R0<kill>; IntRegs:%vreg26 >> 28B %vreg106<def> = TFRI 16777216; >> IntRegs:%vreg106<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<< CurrentTop >> 32B %vreg29<def> = COPY %D2<kill>; DoubleRegs:%vreg29 >> 48B %vreg28<def> = COPY %D1<kill>; DoubleRegs:%vreg28 >> <<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<&lt...
2012 Aug 28
0
[LLVMdev] Assert in LiveInterval update
On Aug 28, 2012, at 8:18 AM, Sergei Larin <slarin at codeaurora.org> wrote: > > I've described that issue (see below) when you were out of town... I think > I am getting more context on it. Please take a look... > > So, in short, when the new MI scheduler performs move of an instruction, it > does something like this: > > // Move the instruction to its new
2012 Oct 25
2
[LLVMdev] RegisterCoalescing Pass seems to ignore part of CFG.
...+[464r,592B:0) +[880B,992r:0) 480B%vreg6<def> = COPY %vreg48<kill>; R600_Reg128:%vreg6,%vreg48 register: %vreg6 +[480r,592B:0) +[592B,704r:0) +[880B,1056r:0) 496B%vreg7<def> = COPY %vreg49<kill>; R600_Reg32:%vreg7,%vreg49 register: %vreg7 +[496r,592B:0) +[880B,1088r:0) 512B%vreg29<def> = SETGT_INT 0, 0, 1, 0, 0, 0, %vreg0, 0, 0, 0, %vreg7, 0, 0, 0, 1, pred:%PRED_SEL_OFF, 0; R600_Reg32:%vreg29,%vreg0,%vreg7 register: %vreg29 +[512r,528r:0) 528B%vreg30<def> = COPY %vreg29<kill>; R600_Reg32:%vreg30,%vreg29 register: %vreg30 +[528r,544r:0) 544B%PREDICATE_BIT&lt...
2012 Oct 25
0
[LLVMdev] RegisterCoalescing Pass seems to ignore part of CFG.
...2r:0) > 480B%vreg6<def> = COPY %vreg48<kill>; R600_Reg128:%vreg6,%vreg48 > register: %vreg6 +[480r,592B:0) +[592B,704r:0) +[880B,1056r:0) > 496B%vreg7<def> = COPY %vreg49<kill>; R600_Reg32:%vreg7,%vreg49 > register: %vreg7 +[496r,592B:0) +[880B,1088r:0) > 512B%vreg29<def> = SETGT_INT 0, 0, 1, 0, 0, 0, %vreg0, 0, 0, 0, %vreg7, 0, > 0, 0, 1, pred:%PRED_SEL_OFF, 0; R600_Reg32:%vreg29,%vreg0,%vreg7 > register: %vreg29 +[512r,528r:0) > 528B%vreg30<def> = COPY %vreg29<kill>; R600_Reg32:%vreg30,%vreg29 > register: %vreg30 +[528r,544r:0)...
2012 Aug 30
0
[LLVMdev] MC Register mapping question (MCRegUnitIterator )
...eg26<def> = COPY %R0<kill>; IntRegs:%vreg26 > >> 28B %vreg106<def> = TFRI 16777216; > >> IntRegs:%vreg106<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<< CurrentTop > >> 32B %vreg29<def> = COPY %D2<kill>; DoubleRegs:%vreg29 > >> 48B %vreg28<def> = COPY %D1<kill>; DoubleRegs:%vreg28 > >> <<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<&...
2012 Sep 03
2
[LLVMdev] Assert in LiveInterval update
...gt; 24B %vreg26<def> = COPY %R0<kill>; IntRegs:%vreg26 > 28B %vreg106<def> = TFRI 16777216; > IntRegs:%vreg106<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<< CurrentTop > 32B %vreg29<def> = COPY %D2<kill>; DoubleRegs:%vreg29 > 48B %vreg28<def> = COPY %D1<kill>; DoubleRegs:%vreg28 > <<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<< Need...
2012 Aug 28
2
[LLVMdev] Assert in LiveInterval update
Andy, I've described that issue (see below) when you were out of town... I think I am getting more context on it. Please take a look... So, in short, when the new MI scheduler performs move of an instruction, it does something like this: // Move the instruction to its new location in the instruction stream. MachineInstr *MI = SU->getInstr(); if (IsTopNode) {