search for: x86instrfpstack

I am new to the LLVM backends, I am wondering how instruction selection is done in LLVM backends, I looked at the .td files in Target/X86, they all seem to be small and do not deal with common X86 instructions, i.e. mov, push, pop, etc. Thanks -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL:

...ie(Result, Inserted) = ThePool.insert(std::make_pair(TheKey, New)); assert(Inserted && "Did not insert new Init into pool!"); } return Result->second; } If WORKS is defined, everything builds and tests fine. If it is not defined, TableGen aborts with: lib/Target/X86/X86InstrFPStack.td:212:10: error: In SUBR_FpI16m80: Operand $src1 does not appear in the instruction pattern defm SUBR: FPBinary<fsub ,MRM5m, "subr">; ^ Anyone have a clue why the order of hashing might matter? I've made sure no Inits are deleted anywhere so their memory should not b...

Hi all, I was asked to write a C compiler back end for a dated stack based architecture, i.e. once whose instructions operate only on the top elements of a stack and doesn't use arguments, something like the JVM. I looked at some open source compilers (gcc, sdcc, tinyc and LLVM). To me LLVM seems promising (and I likes C++). Because I'm new here I need your help to understand if: 1)

Hi Sriram, I'm not sure if I understand your question correctly: Do you need to generate code that contains no x87 floating-point instructions altogether, but uses calls into a soft-float library instead? That behaviour can be enabled using the "-soft-float" flag, as far as I know. Or is it only about the fcomi* instructions, which are not supported by pre-Pentium Pro chips? Then I

Hello there, I recently started working on the LLVM backend for a target that doesn't support x87 instructions. Currently, I am in the process of completely disabling some x87 instructions such as fcomi, fcompi,... for a specific sub-target. I also do not have SSE enabled for my sub-target, and llvm resorts to fcomi* instructions for FP compare instructions. Is there a way to bypass the