similar to: [LLVMdev] bug in CSEMap?

Displaying 20 results from an estimated 3000 matches similar to: "[LLVMdev] bug in CSEMap?"

2006 Aug 14
0
[LLVMdev] Re: bug in CSEMap?
I think that the problem is in SelectionDAG::getConstantPool itself. Only Alignment and Offset are used in the ID. This causes false aliases. X86TargetLowering::LowerFABS should also be affected. All of its calls to getConstantPool have the same alignment and offset. Best Regards, Rafael
2006 Aug 14
1
[LLVMdev] Re: bug in CSEMap?
On Mon, 14 Aug 2006, [UTF-8] Rafael Esp?ndola wrote: > I think that the problem is in SelectionDAG::getConstantPool itself. > Only Alignment and Offset are used in the ID. This causes false > aliases. Doh. Sorry about that, I just checked in a fix. Please verify that this corrects the problem. > X86TargetLowering::LowerFABS should also be affected. All of its calls > to
2006 Jul 31
1
[LLVMdev] creating a constant with the address of another constant
In ARM, the conventional way of setting a register to a 32 bit constant is to use a load: --------------------------------- str: .asciz "Hello World" .text main: ... ldr r0, .L3 .... .L3: .word str ----------------------------------- To implement this, LowerGlobalAddress must add an element to the constant pool (.L3 in the example). How can I implement this?
2008 Mar 31
0
[LLVMdev] Being able to know the jitted code-size before emitting
Hi, Two questions. 1) How are you computing size of the method being jitted? 2) Why not simply add the functionality of allocating emission buffer of specific size to MachineCodeEmitter instead? Thanks, Evan On Mar 30, 2008, at 12:05 PM, Nicolas Geoffray wrote: > Hi everyone, > > vmkit requires to know the size of a jitted method before emitting > the method. This allows to
2008 Apr 01
0
[LLVMdev] Being able to know the jitted code-size before emitting
On Apr 1, 2008, at 12:50 AM, Nicolas Geoffray wrote: > Hi Evan, > > Evan Cheng wrote: >> 1) How are you computing size of the method being >> jitted? > > I add a new pass with addSimpleCodeEmitter, with the emitter being a > SizeEmitter. Since the target calls the emitter with functions such as > writeByte, writeWord, etc.... the SizeEmitter class implements these
2008 Apr 01
2
[LLVMdev] Being able to know the jitted code-size before emitting
Hi Evan, Evan Cheng wrote: > 1) How are you computing size of the method being > jitted? I add a new pass with addSimpleCodeEmitter, with the emitter being a SizeEmitter. Since the target calls the emitter with functions such as writeByte, writeWord, etc.... the SizeEmitter class implements these function by incrementing a counter. At the end of the pass, the code size of the
2008 Apr 05
0
[LLVMdev] Being able to know the jitted code-size before emitting
On Apr 4, 2008, at 11:16 PM, Nicolas Geoffray <nicolas.geoffray at lip6.fr> wrote: > Evan Cheng wrote: >> >> Let's see. ARM has it already. PPC has getNumBytesForInstruction so >> you only need to add one to compute function size. Also you only need >> to implement it for targets that support JIT right now, which leaves >> Alpha and X86. I'm
2008 Apr 04
0
[LLVMdev] Being able to know the jitted code-size before emitting
On Apr 4, 2008, at 5:50 AM, Nicolas Geoffray wrote: > Evan Cheng wrote: >> On Apr 1, 2008, at 12:50 AM, Nicolas Geoffray wrote: >> >> >> That's a hack. :-) > > It is if you think that code emitter should only be used for actually > writing somewhere the data. It is not if you find it another useful > utility ;-) Except it's pretty slow at it. :-)
2008 Apr 07
2
[LLVMdev] Being able to know the jitted code-size before emitting
Hi Evan, Evan Cheng wrote: > > I don't think the duplication is going to be top much of a problem. If > it is, I'll bug you about refactoring. :) > > I don't mean to show how lazy I can be, but I also need to know the size of the exception table emitted in memory (JITDwarfEmitter.cpp). Reviewing it a little, I can not see how things won't be duplicated.
2008 Apr 04
3
[LLVMdev] Being able to know the jitted code-size before emitting
Evan Cheng wrote: > On Apr 1, 2008, at 12:50 AM, Nicolas Geoffray wrote: > > > That's a hack. :-) It is if you think that code emitter should only be used for actually writing somewhere the data. It is not if you find it another useful utility ;-) > Some targets already have ways to compute the exact > size of a function. See ARM::GetFunctionSize()
2008 Apr 05
2
[LLVMdev] Being able to know the jitted code-size before emitting
Evan Cheng wrote: > > Let's see. ARM has it already. PPC has getNumBytesForInstruction so > you only need to add one to compute function size. Also you only need > to implement it for targets that support JIT right now, which leaves > Alpha and X86. I'm guessing Alpha is using fixed encoding so it should > be pretty easy. Or you can just punt it and let the target
2008 Apr 07
0
[LLVMdev] Being able to know the jitted code-size before emitting
On Apr 7, 2008, at 3:02 AM, Nicolas Geoffray wrote: > Hi Evan, > > Evan Cheng wrote: >> >> I don't think the duplication is going to be top much of a problem. >> If >> it is, I'll bug you about refactoring. :) >> >> > > I don't mean to show how lazy I can be, but I also need to know the > size > of the exception table
2008 Sep 13
2
[LLVMdev] Alignment of constant loads
On Fri, September 12, 2008 11:33 am, Stefanus Du Toit wrote: > Hi, > > We've noticed that constant loads, e.g. of v4f32 types, are not > aligned to the preferred alignment but rather to the ABI alignment, at > least on x86. On x86 targets it's usually 16 for both preferred and ABI. I guess you're using a target with a lower ABI alignment for vectors? > This seems to
2008 Sep 15
0
[LLVMdev] Alignment of constant loads
Hi Dan, > It looks like the best way to do this is to visit the handful of > places in legalize that create loads from constant pools and > add alignment parameters to the getLoad/getExtLoad calls. > > If you move the handling of Alignment==0 out of ScheduleDAGEmit.cpp > and into SelectionDAG::getConstantPool, you can then have legalize > read the alignment from the node,
2008 Mar 30
3
[LLVMdev] Being able to know the jitted code-size before emitting
Hi everyone, vmkit requires to know the size of a jitted method before emitting the method. This allows to allocate the correct size for the method. The attached patch creates this functionality when the flag SizedMemoryCode is on. In order to implement this functionality, i had to virtualize some MachineCodeEmitter functions. Is it OK to commit the patch? Thanks, Nicolas --------------
2017 Aug 06
2
VBROADCAST Implementation Issues
i want to implement gather for v64i32. i wrote following code. def GATHER_256B : I<0x68, MRMSrcMem, (outs VR_2048:$dst), (ins i2048mem:$src), "GATHER_256B\t{$src, $dst|$dst, $src}", [(set VR_2048:$dst, (v64i32 (masked_gather addr:$src)))], IIC_MOV_MEM>, TA; def: Pat<(v64f32 (masked_gather addr:$src)), (GATHER_256B
2017 Aug 07
2
VBROADCAST Implementation Issues
Hello, I did as you said, Please tell me whether the following correct now?? def GATHER_256B : I<0x68, MRMSrcMem, (outs VR_2048:$dst, _.KRCWM:$mask_wb), (VR_2048:$src1, _.KRCWM:$mask, ins i2048mem:$src2), "GATHER_256B\t{$src2, {$dst}{${mask}}|${dst} {${mask}}, $src2}"), [(set VR_2048:$dst, _.KRCWM:$mask_wb, (v64i32 (GatherNode
2009 Nov 10
4
[LLVMdev] Altivec vs the type legalizer
PPC Altivec supports vector type v16i8 (and others) where the element type is not legal (in llvm's implementation). When we have a BUILD_VECTOR of these types with constant elements, LegalizeTypes first promotes the element types to i32, then builds a constant pool entry of type v16i32. This is wrong. I can fix it by truncating the elements back to i8 in ExpandBUILD_VECTOR. Does
2006 Oct 19
1
[LLVMdev] jump table x constant pool
I had some problems adding the address of a jump table to the constant pool. The problem is that the address of a jump table is not a GlobalValue.Currently I decided to expand BRIND so that I can work on simpler problems :-) A small brain dump on the issue: GlobalValues are currently used to represent functions and global variables. Maybe we could also use then for anything that will have a label
2011 Sep 13
3
[LLVMdev] Handling of DebugLocs during CSE of SelectionDAG nodes.
I've been investigating a case with the XCore target (which doesn't use FastISel) where the DWARF line number emitted at -O0 results in the xgdb visiting source lines in an unexpected order. I've tracked down the problem to the handling of DebugLocs in the selection DAG, in the getNode method shown bellow. It first tries to find if a similar node already exists in order to use that