similar to: [LLVMdev] Creation of Intrinsics with Pointer Return Types

Hello, LLVM's intrinsic overloading mechanism does not currently support overloading on pointer types. Patches to implement this would be welcome. Dan On May 7, 2008, at 9:25 AM, aditya vishnubhotla wrote: > Hi, > I tried creating intrinsics which are to be > placeholders for a set of instructions (actually a section of a > basic block) to be executed elsewhere(for e.g. in

Hi, I tried creating variable argument intrinsics which are to be placeholders for some instructions which should not be executed by the backend. Kindly help me with the errors in my "migrate_begin" intrinsic creation //Additions made to Intrinsics.td file: def llvm_migrate_begin : LLVMType<iAny>; def int_migrate_begin :

On Feb 19, 2008, at 1:11 AM, aditya vishnubhotla wrote: > Hi, > I tried creating variable argument intrinsics which > are to be placeholders for some instructions which > should not be executed by the backend. > > Kindly help me with the errors in my "migrate_begin" > intrinsic creation > > //Additions made to Intrinsics.td file: > > def

Hi, Thank You for the advice and we were able to solve that problem by the following modifications to the Instrinsics.td file. But I now have an "Invalid Intrinsic name" error This error occurs presumably because the created intrinsic is named: llvm.migrate_begin.i32 Intrinsics.gen checks for a string length of 18 (i.e. the length without the .i32). Kindly help me through it.

Hi, If I define a intrinsic function with pointer-typed parameter, for example, def llvm_foo_ptr_ty : LLVMPointerType<llvm_i16_ty>; def int_foo_get : Intrinsic<[llvm_foo_ptr_ty], [llvm_foo_ptr_ty, llvm_i32_ty], [IntrReadArgMem]>; How to lower it for the backend? I'm not sure what kind of register (i16 or i32 or i32) is needed in this case? If the parameter is

Hi, I have implemented intrinsics which are placeholders for instructions executed elsewhere (e.g. in HW). So i have two types of intrinsics migrate_begin and migrate_end. Now i would like to make these intrinsics known to the PowerPC backend. Since the hardware initialization can not be implemented by one instruction it has to be expanded to a library call or lowered to something the ppc

Hello everyone, Consider we have this following set of code: int foo() { int a,b; a = __builtin_XX(0x11); b = __builtin_XX(0x11); return a+b; } The problem currently is that LLVM eliminated the second call and copied the result from the first call into a new set of registers. Is there is a way to force LLVM to generate two explicit calls to a builtin function. The builtin takes in an integer

Hi, I tried creating intrinsics which are to be placeholders for some instructions which should not be executed by the backend. Kindly help me with the errors in my "migrate_begin" intrinsic creation The following are the additions made to the Intrinsics.td file def llvm_migrate_begin : LLVMType<iAny>; def int_migrate_begin : Intrinsic<[llvm_migrate_begin,llvm_vararg_ty],

On Mon, 5 Feb 2007, Dan Gohman wrote: > LLVM knows what all the types of the intrinsic functions are; I thought, > why are users (including llvm-gcc...) required to duplicate all this > information in order to use them? I mean in order to call > getOrInsertFunction to get declarations for them. That is an excellent question! :) In the bad old days, we used to allow intrinsics

LLVM knows what all the types of the intrinsic functions are; I thought, why are users (including llvm-gcc...) required to duplicate all this information in order to use them? I mean in order to call getOrInsertFunction to get declarations for them. So I wrote this patch, which allows all this code to be generated automatically. Is this a good approach? Dan -- Dan Gohman, Cray Inc. <djg at

Nothing... I'll show you all the info related to: The intrinsic: def int_soru_sre : Intrinsic<[llvm_void_ty, llvm_i32_ty], [IntrWriteMem]>; The lower instruction (in MIPS): class SORUI<bits<6> op, dag outs, dag ins, string asmstr, list<dag> pattern, InstrItinClass itin>: FI<op, outs, ins, asmstr, pattern, itin> { let isBarrier = 1; // or call,

Hello, Julio > These later things are ignored, I don't know if when the intrinsic is > lowered, then it doesn't matter (or perhaps the reorder is made > before). What is the description of the instruction you're lowering intrinsic into? Have you looked for the instruction flags defined in Target.td file? You instruction should definitely have "isBarrier" flag set.

Hello, I have an intrinsic that matches to a asm instruction directly. This intrinsic starts a coprocessor that can do anything. If I put another instruction next to it (a multiplication for example), the "llc" reorders and puts the intrinsic after the multiplication. I have tried all: - Setting the instruction like if it takes 256 cycles or 0 cycles. - Setting the instruction with

Krzysztof Parzyszek via llvm-dev <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> writes: >> -----Original Message----- >> From: llvm-dev <llvm-dev-bounces at lists.llvm.org> On Behalf Of David Greene >> via llvm-dev >> Sent: Thursday, August 29, 2019 10:05 AM >> To: llvm-dev <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> >> Subject: [EXT] [llvm-dev] Complex proposal v2 >>

Hi I'm using the llvm-c wrapper, and trying to build some recursive types (using released 2.3). I get an assert on trying to create a second opaque pointer type after refining a first. The first time through creating an opaque pointer type, a new type is created and returned from PointerType::get, but the second time, ValueType (the opaque type) is found in the PointerTypes map, which seems

Hi, I was talking with aKor in #llvm how we could implement custom operation support for our ASIP architecture. We came into solution that the best way would be to write new custom operation intrinsic and optimization pass for raising certain type of function calls to those intrinsics (similar to raising mallocs). Basically our custom operation are like calls, with operand name and multiple

On Tue, 31 Jul 2007, [ISO-8859-1] Mikael Lepist� wrote: > I was talking with aKor in #llvm how we could implement custom operation > support for our ASIP architecture. We came into solution that the best > way would be to write new custom operation intrinsic and optimization > pass for raising certain type of function calls to those intrinsics > (similar to raising mallocs). >

No, I don't. Cheers, Gary Dale Johannesen wrote: > This looks OK to check in, do you have write access? > > On Aug 21, 2008, at 6:38 AMPDT, Gary Benson wrote: > > >Dale Johannesen wrote: > >>On Aug 19, 2008, at 7:18 AMPDT, Gary Benson wrote: > >>>I'm trying to implement llvm.memory.barrier on PowerPC. I've > >>>modelled my patch

On Mon, Feb 05, 2007 at 12:28:56PM -0800, Chris Lattner wrote: > On Mon, 5 Feb 2007, Dan Gohman wrote: > > > LLVM knows what all the types of the intrinsic functions are; I thought, > > why are users (including llvm-gcc...) required to duplicate all this > > information in order to use them? I mean in order to call > > getOrInsertFunction to get declarations for

I am currently working on DAGToDAGISel class for MIPS and am trying to figure out a way to use INTRINSIC_W_CHAIN for an intrinsic which can return a value. My intrinsic is defined as: Intrinsic<[llvm_i32_ty],[llvm_i32_ty,llvm_i32_ty,llvm_i32_ty,llvm_i32_ty],[IntrReadWriteArgMem]>; i.e. it has four arguments and one return value In DAGToDAGISel when I try to pass it with four arguments and