similar to: [SelectionDAG] DbgValue nodes aren't transferred

Hi Sejong, Indeed, I think you are right and we should call transferDbgValues in SetPromotedInteger. I couldn’t immediately find a suitable in-tree test to verify this though. Can you check and let me know whether this works for your target? Thanks, Jonas > On Mar 13, 2018, at 7:45 PM, Se Jong Oh <sejooh at microsoft.com> wrote: > > Thanks for help! I think that sign extension

Thanks for help! I think that sign extension is not involved here. PromoteIntegerResult is called since i32 is not a legal type in my target and the legalizer promotes operations with i32 result type to i64 operations. I think that SetPromotedInteger seems to be a common place for all promotions like SetExpandedInteger. Jonas, I would appreciate it if you can guide me about whether my

+ Adrian, Joshua + Jonas, since he contributed the transferDbgValues change in DAGTypeLegalizer::SetExpandedInteger > On Mar 8, 2018, at 5:44 PM, Se Jong Oh via llvm-dev <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: > > Hi, > > I have a problem that dbg_value nodes are not transferred when integer DAG nodes are promoted. For example, an i32 add node is promoted to a i64 add node by

Hi Jonas, Thanks for taking a look! It makes linear-dbg-value.ll pass for my target by producing DEBUG_VALUEs correctly. I also tried a simple function with few operations and confirmed DEBUG_VALUEs which are not produced without trasferDbgValues in SetPromotedInteger. Thanks, Sejong From: jdevlieghere at apple.com <jdevlieghere at apple.com> Sent: Wednesday, March 14, 2018 4:07 AM To: Se

Hi, I have a problem that dbg_value nodes are not transferred when integer DAG nodes are promoted. For example, an i32 add node is promoted to a i64 add node by DAGTypeLegalizer::PromoteIntegerResult and its dbg_value node is not transferred to the new node. t9: i32 = add nsw t5, t8 --> t31: i64 = add t30, t7 ; the dbg_value node is not transferred to the new i64 add node. For expansion,

Thanks! It looks like SelectionDAG::salvageDebugInfo handles only addition with constant. Sejong From: aprantl at apple.com <aprantl at apple.com> Sent: Monday, April 30, 2018 1:53 PM To: Se Jong Oh <sejooh at microsoft.com> Cc: jdevlieghere at apple.com; Vedant Kumar <vsk at apple.com>; llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org; pidgeot18 at gmail.com Subject: Re: [llvm-dev] [SelectionDAG]

Hi Jonas, I have another case that DBG_VALUE is not produced. I would appreciate it if you could take a quick look at the testcase below. test code: llc -mtriple=aarch64 -stop-after=livedebugvalues -o - test.ll ; Function Attrs: nounwind ssp uwtable define void @f() #0 !dbg !4 { entry: tail call void @h(i16 0) #2, !dbg !14 %call = tail call i16 (...) @g() #2, !dbg !15 tail call void

> On Mar 14, 2018, at 7:55 PM, Se Jong Oh <sejooh at microsoft.com> wrote: > > Hi Jonas, > > Thanks for taking a look! It makes linear-dbg-value.ll pass for my target by producing DEBUG_VALUEs correctly. I also tried a simple function with few operations and confirmed DEBUG_VALUEs which are not produced without trasferDbgValues in SetPromotedInteger. That’s great news! Do

> On Apr 30, 2018, at 1:49 PM, Se Jong Oh <sejooh at microsoft.com> wrote: > > Hi Jonas, > > I have another case that DBG_VALUE is not produced. I would appreciate it if you could take a quick look at the testcase below. > > > test code: > > llc -mtriple=aarch64 -stop-after=livedebugvalues -o - test.ll > > ; Function Attrs: nounwind ssp uwtable >

For cast instructions, llvm::salvageDebugInfo() simply makes dbg.value point to the source of the cast. Since SelectionDAG already has transferDbgValues which can move dbgvalue to the cast source, I think that we can just call it where the truncate is optimized away. Thanks, Sejong From: aprantl at apple.com <aprantl at apple.com> Sent: Monday, April 30, 2018 2:59 PM To: Se Jong Oh

> On Apr 30, 2018, at 3:16 PM, Se Jong Oh <sejooh at microsoft.com> wrote: > > For cast instructions, llvm::salvageDebugInfo() simply makes dbg.value point to the source of the cast. Since SelectionDAG already has transferDbgValues which can move dbgvalue to the cast source, I think that we can just call it where the truncate is optimized away. That sounds reasonable, yes. Casts

> On Apr 30, 2018, at 2:57 PM, Se Jong Oh <sejooh at microsoft.com> wrote: > > Thanks! It looks like SelectionDAG::salvageDebugInfo handles only addition with constant. You can look at llvm::salvageDebugInfo() for examples on how to handle other situations. -- adrian -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL:

Thanks Devang. Is there any plan on making this implicit in the node creation? Or instead of using DebugLoc in SelectionDAG, use SDDbgValue's instead, or embedding the SDDbgValue in the debug loc itself somehow? This seems like something that shouldn't have to be handled on a case by case basis in the backends. Your thoughts? Thanks, Micah From: Devang Patel [mailto:dpatel at

On Tue, Aug 19, 2008 at 8:40 AM, Eli Friedman <eli.friedman at gmail.com> wrote: > On Tue, Aug 19, 2008 at 8:07 AM, sanjiv gupta > <sanjiv.gupta at microchip.com> wrote: >> On Mon, 2008-08-18 at 08:50 -0700, Eli Friedman wrote: >>> On Mon, Aug 18, 2008 at 6:31 AM, <Sachin.Punyani at microchip.com> wrote: >>> > assert(Res.getValueType() ==

Hi, I'm stumped by how to handle fpowi. Here is the context: my architecture has i64, f32, and f64 registers. No i32. For calls & returns, we promote i32 to i64. There is no support in the architecture to perform fpowi - it has to go through the runtime. I'm using gfortran + dragonegg + llvm3.4 to generate .ll files via plugin. The fortran expression REAL = REAL ** INTEGER*4

On Apr 15, 2011, at 2:21 PM, Villmow, Micah wrote: > John/Richard, > I think I have found the problem to why the debug information is getting destroyed. The problem is in SelectionDAG and how it interacts with the SDDbgValue nodes and custom SDNodes. > > When the dbg_value intrinsic is encountered, it adds the debug value to a specific SD Node in

If I have an operand as a Value from an instruction like: Value* V = opnd->get(); and I am sure this is a variable, I want to know the variable name (in source code) for this Value object. I am doing it like this: const Function* Func; if (const Argument* Arg = dyn_cast<Argument>(V)) { Func =

> so I think we need to use non-extending load for element size less than 8bit on "DAGTypeLegalizer::SplitVecOp_EXTRACT_VECTOR_ELT" like this roughly. > if (N->getOperand(0).getValueType().getVectorElementType().getSizeInBits() < 8) { > return DAG.getLoad(N->getValueType(0), dl, Store, StackPtr, MachinePointerInfo()); > } else { > return

Hi all, I've run into an assert in LegalizeTypes that is puzzling. It is in NodeUpdateListener::NodeUpdated: void NodeUpdated(SDNode *N) override { // Node updates can mean pretty much anything. It is possible that an // operand was set to something already processed (f.e.) in which case // this node could become ready. Recompute its flags.

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