similar to: llvm-dev Digest, Vol 166, Issue 22

Hi, On 01/22/2016 05:02 PM, Tom Stellard wrote: > On Fri, Jan 22, 2016 at 01:58:49PM +0100, Mikael Holmén via llvm-dev wrote: >> Hi, >> >> I'm a litle bit puzzled by the TargetLowering::LowerOperation function, >> and what different callers of this function assumes about the returned >> value. >> > SelectionDAGLegalize::LegalizeOp() is your best

Here is a last example to illustrate my concern. The problem is about the lowering of node t13. Initial selection DAG: BB#0 '_start:entry' SelectionDAG has 44 nodes: t11: i16 = Constant<0> t0: ch = EntryToken t3: ch = llvm.clp.set.rspa t0, TargetConstant:i16<392>, Constant:i32<64> t5: ch = llvm.clp.set.rspb t3,

The DAG dumping will try to print some of the nodes "inline" (i.e. where they are used) to make the output more readable, so the dump of the DAG may not strictly reflect the node ordering. -Krzysztof On 5/4/2018 8:18 AM, Dominique Torette via llvm-dev wrote: > Here is a last example to illustrate my concern. > > The problem is about the lowering of node t13. > >

Krzysztof, Thanks for your interest to my questions. In order to clarify the context, here is the C source file of my test case. The 3 builtins initialize some stack pointers. They have to be executed before any other instruction. extern float fdivfaddfmul_a(float a, float b, float c, float d); volatile static float x1,x2,x3,x4; void _start(void) { float res;

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

Hi, I am having issues running a new backend that I created for a new architecture. I suspect these errors may have something to do with how I have the string setup in LLVMTargetMachine() below? Also - It would be great if someone could point me to a document that describes some of these error messages? For example what does t26 ..t4 mean? Thanks in advance for taking your valuable time to help

Hi, I'm a litle bit puzzled by the TargetLowering::LowerOperation function, and what different callers of this function assumes about the returned value. In several places it seems like it is assumed that LowerOperation can return three kinds of values: * Something completely new. * SDValue() * The same SDValue as LowerOperation was called on. However in some places, e.g. in

I see we're missing an isel pattern for add producing carry and doing a memory RMW. I'm going to see if adding that helps anything. ~Craig On Mon, Feb 27, 2017 at 8:47 PM, Nirav Davé via llvm-dev < llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: > Yes. I'm seeing that as well. Not clear what's going on. > > In any case it looks to be unrelated to the alias analysis so barring

This is the definition of BITCAST in include/llvm/CodeGen/ISDOpcodes.h: // BITCAST - This operator converts between integer, vector and FP // values, as if the value was stored to memory with one type and loaded // from the same address with the other type (or equivalently for vector // format conversions, etc). The source and result are required to have // the same bit size (e.g. f32 <->

Hi Akira, > This is the definition of BITCAST in include/llvm/CodeGen/ISDOpcodes.h: > > // BITCAST - This operator converts between integer, vector and FP > // values, as if the value was stored to memory with one type and loaded > // from the same address with the other type (or equivalently for vector > // format conversions, etc). The source and result are required to have

Hi all, Our target does not have native support for 64-bit integers, so we rely on library calls for certain operations (like sdiv). We recently ran into a problem where these operations that are expanded to library calls aren't maintaining the proper ordering in relation to other chains in the DAG. The following snippet of a DAG demonstrates the problem. t0: ch = EntryToken t2:

Hi Duncan and llvm developers, The attached patch makes the function return true if the conversion is between a vector and an integer of the same size. Please review when you have time. On Tue, Jul 10, 2012 at 12:21 AM, Duncan Sands <baldrick at free.fr> wrote: > Hi Akira, > > > This is the definition of BITCAST in include/llvm/CodeGen/ISDOpcodes.h: > > > > //

Hi, I was wondering if there is a way to specify macros to help shorten rewriting patterns like these: def : Pat <(v4i8 (mul (v4i8 IntRegs:$a), (v4i8 IntRegs:$b))), (v4i8 (VTRUNEHB (v4i16 (VTRUNEWH (v2i32 (VMPYH (v2i16 (EXTRACT_SUBREG (v4i16 (VSXTBH (v4i8 IntRegs:$a))), subreg_hireg)), (v2i16 (EXTRACT_SUBREG (v4i16 (VSXTBH (v4i8

Type::canLoslesslyBitCastTo(Type *Ty) in lib/VMCore/Type.cpp always returns false when it checks whether an integer can be bitcast to a vector or vice versa. For example, (i32 => v2i16) or (v2i16 => i32) is false. But it seems that it returns true if it is checking conversion between two vector types which have the same size. For example, (v4i8 => v2i16) would return true. What is the

I was trying to do a pattern matching for a rd+imm instruction in my own backend. It looks something like: def: Pat<build_vector v2i16:$src1, v2i16:$src2, (OR (SLLI GPR: $src1,16), GPR:$src2>; OR takes two i32 in registers and SLLI takes one i32 in registers and an immediate. But the immediate '16' does not work here and I tried different ways. May I know if any of you have any idea

Hi Guys We have a strange a strange issue at a client they have 3 panels on their phone and every so often the panels reboot themselves yet the phone stays on. We decided to replace the T26 for a T28 to see if it fixes the issue and still have the exact same issue. Has anyone seen this before? -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL:

Hi, How can we set the minimum addressable memory unit to be 32 bit ? As far as I know, getTargetData() provides all type sizes and alignments to compute address offsets assuming a MAU of 8 bits. But what if I have a MAU of 32 bits ? Currently I have 2 legal types in my BE, i16 and v2i16, and I could set TargetData in order to have v2i16 types with a size and alignment of 8 bits. Doing so, I

On Fri, Dec 9, 2011 at 4:12 PM, Ivan Llopard <ivanllopard at gmail.com> wrote: > Hi Eli, > Thanks for your response. Please see my responses below. > > > On 10/12/2011 00:28, Eli Friedman wrote: >> >> On Fri, Dec 9, 2011 at 4:46 AM, Llopard Ivan<ivanllopard at gmail.com> >>  wrote: >>> >>> Hi all, >>> >>> I am writing

Hello. I fixed the bug reported in the previous post on this thread (<<llvm::MemSDNode::MemSDNode(unsigned int, unsigned int, const llvm::DebugLoc&, llvm::SDVTList, llvm::EVT, llvm::MachineMemOperand*): Assertion `memvt.getStoreSize() <= MMO->getSize() && "Size mismatch!"' failed.>>) The problem with this strange error reported comes from

On 10/12/2011 01:32, Eli Friedman wrote: > On Fri, Dec 9, 2011 at 4:12 PM, Ivan Llopard<ivanllopard at gmail.com> wrote: >> Hi Eli, >> Thanks for your response. Please see my responses below. >> >> >> On 10/12/2011 00:28, Eli Friedman wrote: >>> On Fri, Dec 9, 2011 at 4:46 AM, Llopard Ivan<ivanllopard at gmail.com> >>> wrote: