similar to: CodeEmitterGen generates wrong code for getBinaryCodeForInstr

Hi, *case MICROBLAZE::BGEID:* * {* * // op: raencoder* * op = getMachineOpValue(MI, MI.getOperand(0), Fixups, STI);* * Value |= (op & UINT64_C(31)) << 16;* * // op: imm16* * op = getMachineOpValue(MI, MI.getOperand(0), Fixups, STI); -> should be operand[1]* * Value |= op & UINT64_C(65535);* * break;* * }* I have added

On Thu, 04 Jun 2009 22:55:04 +0200, Pertti Kellomäki <pertti.kellomaki at tut.fi> wrote: > Hi Adam, > > John is right, the TCE stuff would be useful for you. Our > compiler targets a processor template that the designer can > populate pretty freely. The compiler then reads the architecture > description and creates an LLVM backend on the fly. > > Please don't

On Apr 18, 2007, at 11:25 AM, Christopher Lamb wrote: > I noticed that the TableGen code emitter generator assumes that the > instruction fields are declared in the instruction format in the > same order that operands are defined. This seems like a bad > dependence to me, and that TableGen should match the name of field > declared in the instruction with the name of the

I noticed that the TableGen code emitter generator assumes that the instruction fields are declared in the instruction format in the same order that operands are defined. This seems like a bad dependence to me, and that TableGen should match the name of field declared in the instruction with the name of the operand in order to determine which operand of the MI to use . See

On Apr 18, 2007, at 2:07 PM, Evan Cheng wrote: > > On Apr 18, 2007, at 11:25 AM, Christopher Lamb wrote: > >> I noticed that the TableGen code emitter generator assumes that >> the instruction fields are declared in the instruction format in >> the same order that operands are defined. This seems like a bad >> dependence to me, and that TableGen should match

Hi Adam, John is right, the TCE stuff would be useful for you. Our compiler targets a processor template that the designer can populate pretty freely. The compiler then reads the architecture description and creates an LLVM backend on the fly. Please don't hesitate to get in touch with us if you have questions. -- Pertti

Hello gyus, I am working on a project, where we are trying to create a development environment for new ASIP processor design. Part of this project is a compiler generator, where we would like to generate C compiler from some instruction description. To keep it short, let's say, that in each instruction's semantics is described by some C code. What I would like to do is to compile this