similar to: more different predicates (not only should)?

On Tue, May 24, 2011 at 3:02 AM, roy rosen <roy.1rosen at gmail.com> wrote: > Hi, > > I was wondering if LLVM supports predicates and conditional execution. > Something like we have in IA64. > There is a register class of predicates and then every instruction may > be predicated by a register from this class. > For example: > > cmp_less p, x, y // p is a predicate

Hi all, I have an array of shipping_type''s being returned, and I want to see what is in there. In the past I have done: shipping_type.include?(Cart::SHIPPING_TYPE_REGULAR).should be_true This works, but looks really ugly.. It just doesn''t roll of the tongue very well. I then looked up the use of Predicates, which I had been using, but hadn''t realized:

On Tue, May 24, 2011 at 8:35 AM, roy rosen <roy.1rosen at gmail.com> wrote: > 2011/5/24 Justin Holewinski <justin.holewinski at gmail.com>: > > On Tue, May 24, 2011 at 3:02 AM, roy rosen <roy.1rosen at gmail.com> wrote: > >> > >> Hi, > >> > >> I was wondering if LLVM supports predicates and conditional execution. > >>

2011/5/24 Justin Holewinski <justin.holewinski at gmail.com>: > On Tue, May 24, 2011 at 3:02 AM, roy rosen <roy.1rosen at gmail.com> wrote: >> >> Hi, >> >> I was wondering if LLVM supports predicates and conditional execution. >> Something like we have in IA64. >> There is a register class of predicates and then every instruction may >> be

I tried to add an 'OptForSize' requirement to a pattern in X86InstrSSE.td, but it appears to be ignored. However, the condition was detected when specified as a predicate. So this doesn't work: def : Pat<(v2f64 (X86VBroadcast (loadf64 addr:$src))), (VMOVDDUPrm addr: $src)>, *Requires<[OptForSize**]>*; But this does: * let Predicates = [OptForSize]

Hi, I was wondering if LLVM supports predicates and conditional execution. Something like we have in IA64. There is a register class of predicates and then every instruction may be predicated by a register from this class. For example: cmp_less p, x, y // p is a predicate which gets the result of x < y p add x, x, 2 // if p then do the add instruction Is there support in LLVM to something

On May 24, 2011, at 12:02 AM, roy rosen wrote: > Hi, > > I was wondering if LLVM supports predicates and conditional execution. > Something like we have in IA64. > There is a register class of predicates and then every instruction may > be predicated by a register from this class. > For example: > > cmp_less p, x, y // p is a predicate which gets the result of x <

> -----Original Message----- > From: llvmdev-bounces at cs.uiuc.edu [mailto:llvmdev-bounces at cs.uiuc.edu] > On Behalf Of Tom Stellard > Sent: 19 September 2014 01:36 > To: Sanjay Patel > Cc: llvmdev at cs.uiuc.edu > Subject: Re: [LLVMdev] predicates vs. requirements [TableGen, > X86InstrInfo.td] > > On Thu, Sep 18, 2014 at 03:25:07PM -0600, Sanjay Patel wrote: >

Hello, I have a few questions about applying the IfConversion pass to my out-of-tree target. (1) Is it true that the IfConversion pass may only run after register allocation? I often encounter this bad scenario, and I think it could be entirely avoided if IfConversion ran before register allocation: the block-to-be-predicated contains load-immediate (LI) instructions. The LI instructions

In our architecture (TCE) we have predicate registers, not flags. But our predicates work in a way that in the predicated instruction do not contain only the predicate register, but a predicate register and boolean value pair, the boolean value stating if the instruction is to be executed only if the register is true(normal behavior of predicate regs) or only if the predicate reg is

Could we expose predicates defined in the target InstrInfo.td file to the MachineVerifier? We use BuildMI() to create many instructions after ISEL, but the predicates are not being checked at this point. Thus, I could forget to check the target and build an instruction that is illegal for a specific configuration. In such a case it would be nice if the MachineVerifier could detect this for me.

Well, Requires is just a fancy way to add predicates. For mips16 and micro mips, we want to use them in a similar way as ARM does, I think, to how they are used for thumb and thumb2. The problem lies with tablegen. Whenever predicates are overriden by a derived class, it overwrites the previous definition. There is no way, it seems, to add to an existing list as you further derive classes.

Hey folks, We are having some difficulty with how we have been representing our predicate registers, and wanted some advice from the list. First, we had been representing our predicate registers as 1 bit (i1). The truth, however, is that they are 8 bits. The reason for this is that they serve as predicates for conditional execution of instructions, branch condition codes, and also as

On Tue, Feb 28, 2012 at 11:17 AM, Tony Linthicum <tlinth at codeaurora.org> wrote: > Hey folks, > > We are having some difficulty with how we have been representing our > predicate registers, and wanted some advice from the list.  First, we > had been representing our predicate registers as 1 bit (i1).  The truth, > however, is that they are 8 bits.  The reason for this is

On Oct 7, 2007, at 12:51 AM, Nikhil A. Patil wrote: > Hi, > > I am planning to generate code for a peculiar architecture with > _no_ branch instructions (!), but with predicated loads and stores > to memory. This means the architecture is not Turing complete, is > going to waste a lot of computation, and any input program that can > hope to get compiled for this

Hi, I am planning to generate code for a peculiar architecture with _no_ branch instructions (!), but with predicated loads and stores to memory. This means the architecture is not Turing complete, is going to waste a lot of computation, and any input program that can hope to get compiled for this architecture must have loops that can be fully unrolled, and all its functions must get fully

Hi Eli, On Thu, Mar 1, 2012 at 2:21 PM, Eli Friedman <eli.friedman at gmail.com> wrote: > On Tue, Feb 28, 2012 at 11:17 AM, Tony Linthicum <tlinth at codeaurora.org> wrote: >> Hey folks, >> >> We are having some difficulty with how we have been representing our >> predicate registers, and wanted some advice from the list.  First, we >> had been

On Wed, Oct 31, 2012 at 09:13:43PM +0100, Bjorn De Sutter wrote: > Hi all, > > I am working on a CGRA backend (something like a 2D VLIW), and we also absolutely need predication. I extended the IfConversion pass to allow it to be executed multiple times and to predicate already predicated code. This is necessary to predicate code with nested conditional statements. At this point, we

--- crowd-funded eco-conscious hardware: https://www.crowdsupply.com/eoma68 On Thu, Jan 31, 2019 at 10:22 PM Jacob Lifshay <programmerjake at gmail.com> wrote: > > We're in-progress designing a RISC-V extension (http://lists.libre-riscv.org/pipermail/libre-riscv-dev/2019-January/000433.html) that would have variable-length vectors of short vectors (1 to 4): > <VL x <4 x

Hi to everyone, I''m an RSpec, and BDD in general, newbie so in order to learn I have chosen to use my personal website as a tesbed. I''m having difficulties juggling with mocks, and in particula with the following code. Here''s the controller action: def create @album = Album.new(params[:album]) if @album.save flash[:notice] = "album saved"