similar to: [LLVMdev] setting conditons (flags) with arithmetic instructions and conditional branching

Hi all, I'm pretty new to the community, but I've run into a number of questions while building a backend for a custom target. I'll keep it to one topic per thread, though. My target has arithmetic instructions (add, sub, etc...) which all set the flags register. There is no explicit comparison instruction for my target. The conditional branching instructions check the flags

Daniel, Can we add the relevant plugins for pretty printing of source code? On Fri, Mar 20, 2009 at 4:45 AM, Aaron Gray <aaronngray.lists at googlemail.com > wrote: > >Done > > Yay, we got Wiki, now I can do some wicked UML diagrams for LLVM, he, he, > he > :) > > Many thanks, > > Aaron > > On Thu, Mar 19, 2009 at 3:58 PM, Daniel Berlin <dberlin at

>Done Yay, we got Wiki, now I can do some wicked UML diagrams for LLVM, he, he, he :) Many thanks, Aaron On Thu, Mar 19, 2009 at 3:58 PM, Daniel Berlin <dberlin at dberlin.org> wrote: > As soon as i get out of this meeting I will > > On Thu, Mar 19, 2009 at 3:22 PM, someguy > <just.s0m3.guy+llvmdev at gmail.com> wrote: >> Daniel, can you set up the virtual

someguy wrote: > Oh. One more thing: > > Paulo, while your working out how to do what Chris said (making usage > of bigints into library calls), wouldn't it just warm your heart to > document the process on the wiki? > > </wiki pimping> > > On Wed, Mar 25, 2009 at 9:16 AM, someguy > <just.s0m3.guy+llvmdev at gmail.com> wrote: > >> Oh. I

As soon as i get out of this meeting I will On Thu, Mar 19, 2009 at 3:22 PM, someguy <just.s0m3.guy+llvmdev at gmail.com> wrote: > Daniel, can you set up the virtual host please? > > On Thu, Mar 19, 2009 at 9:02 PM, John Criswell <criswell at cs.uiuc.edu> wrote: >> John Criswell wrote: >>> someguy wrote: >>> >>>> Hi All, >>>>

I'll see which plugins others use. Which wiki's pretty printing are you thinking of in particular? 2009/3/23 someguy <just.s0m3.guy+llvmdev at gmail.com>: > Daniel, > Can we add the relevant plugins for pretty printing of source code? > > On Fri, Mar 20, 2009 at 4:45 AM, Aaron Gray > <aaronngray.lists at googlemail.com> wrote: >> >> >Done >>

Done On Thu, Mar 19, 2009 at 3:58 PM, Daniel Berlin <dberlin at dberlin.org> wrote: > As soon as i get out of this meeting I will > > On Thu, Mar 19, 2009 at 3:22 PM, someguy > <just.s0m3.guy+llvmdev at gmail.com> wrote: >> Daniel, can you set up the virtual host please? >> >> On Thu, Mar 19, 2009 at 9:02 PM, John Criswell <criswell at cs.uiuc.edu>

On Mar 22, 2009, at 7:53 AM, someguy wrote: > Hi all, > > I've spent the day trying to understand setcc/select_cc intricacies, > and I thought I should mention that so far as I can tell, the modeling > of CPU flags, condition codes and therefore conditional instructions > seems pretty broken. > > On the one hand there are the SDNPInFlag/SDNPOutFlag node properties >

The reason for my suggestion is that adding intrinsics is also considered to be a breaking change. This is the third question/suggestion in the last week or so where the intrinsics/pseudo-function idea has been raised. Perhaps what llvm really needs is a 'generic' pseudo-intrinsic of some kind? 2009/3/30 Milos Puzovic <milos.puzovic at gmail.com> > 2009/3/30 someguy

Hi all, I'm pretty new to LLVM and am slowly learning the code-base and architecture, mostly as a result of my efforts to implement a target backend. There are a number of resources (read: documents) available which deal with some parts of backend development (and LLVM development in general), but sadly they are not at all comprehensive. I'd like to propose that a wiki be made available

On Mar 24, 2009, at 11:20 PM, someguy wrote: > I could be wrong, but I think that you may need to add a 'big-integer' > intrinsic type to llvm. No, please don't. GMP is just another library like libc, your front- end should just generate calls into it like any other library. This is similar to how we handle threading and many other "language features". -Chris

Thank you. I just downloaded the binaries... Maybe I should compile it in my PC. I'll have a try. Thanks. $ file llvm-gcc llvm-gcc: ELF 32-bit LSB executable, Intel 80386, version 1 (SYSV), dynamically linked (uses shared libs), for GNU/Linux 2.2.5, not stripped 2009/3/16 someguy <just.s0m3.guy+llvmdev at gmail.com>: > How did you compile LLVM? > > Can you please 'file

2009/3/30 someguy <just.s0m3.guy+llvmdev at gmail.com<just.s0m3.guy%2Bllvmdev at gmail.com> > > Can you not achieve the same effect without adding intrinsics? Insert > function calls to a __spawn and __join pseudo-function instead? > It would make LLVM code generation more difficult because instead of building a new instruction (in this case intrinsic) you will be building

John Criswell wrote: > someguy wrote: > >> Hi All, >> >> I've started outlining the notes I'd like to see on the wiki on the >> front page (http://google2.osuosl.org/wiki/index.php/Main_Page). >> >> I'll hopefully add a bunch of those as I go along, but feel free to >> both correct my mistakes and fill in the blanks. >> >>

Daniel, can you set up the virtual host please? On Thu, Mar 19, 2009 at 9:02 PM, John Criswell <criswell at cs.uiuc.edu> wrote: > John Criswell wrote: >> someguy wrote: >> >>> Hi All, >>> >>> I've started outlining the notes I'd like to see on the wiki on the >>> front page (http://google2.osuosl.org/wiki/index.php/Main_Page).

Oh. I see. That way the bigints don't need a representation in llvm IR... neat. Sorry for the misdirecton! On Wed, Mar 25, 2009 at 8:38 AM, Chris Lattner <clattner at apple.com> wrote: > > On Mar 24, 2009, at 11:20 PM, someguy wrote: > >> I could be wrong, but I think that you may need to add a 'big-integer' >> intrinsic type to llvm. > > No, please

Hi, A number of transforms are actually independent, so here's a partial fix. I updated the dependencies in a cluster of transforms: LowerSwitch, Mem2Reg, LowerSelect, LowerAllocations, UnifyFunctionExitNodes. The patch has been tested, but not extensively. PassManager doesn't complain, and the result of a test pass that requires all these (except for LowerAllocations) together works

Hi, Few more questions that I found while trying to develop a new backend. And sorry if I ask too many questions. 1) My target (embedded processor, which is a "not so direct" successor of Z80 family of processors) does not support SELECT, so I was looking for a workaround. First I was thinking about expanding it into conditional flow with branching, but then I have found that there

Hello, We have the architecture without conditional moves. Which way can we lower select? As we know there was the special pass a long time ago, but it was deleted. commit c3591a0d48ce045bbf5ae0d78a41f3dae4bb99db Author: Chris Lattner <sabre at nondot.org> Date:   Tue Feb 19 07:49:17 2008 +0000     remove the LowerSelect pass.  The last client was the old Sparc backend, which is long

I agree too. I'm working on an analysis pass and I could be adding info to a wiki as I discover how to do things. Anthony On Mar 11, 2009, at 4:22 AM, someguy wrote: > Hi all, > > I'm pretty new to LLVM and am slowly learning the code-base and > architecture, mostly as a result of my efforts to implement a target > backend. > > There are a number of resources