similar to: [LLVMdev] RFC: MachineInstr Annotations

On Jul 31, 2009, at 11:17 AM, David Greene wrote: > I'm getting to the point where I want to contribute some more > MachineInstr comment support for things like spills. As we've > discussed before, we don't have all of the information available > in AsmPrinter to synthesize the kind of comments that can be > helpful for debugging performance issues with register

On Monday 13 July 2009 15:46, Chris Lattner wrote: > Well sure, but how is that relevant? Just generate llvm.stoppoint and > isel turns them into debug locs. Just because debugloc isn't on > llvm::Instruction doesn't mean you don't get line numbers :). You're right, it's not a big hurdle. > > Ok, here's an example: > > > > movl

On Monday 13 July 2009 15:58, David Greene wrote: > Again, after answering the FI stack slot question, the IR-level instruction > information is the only thing we can't do through asmprinter. I'm open to > other ways of capturing the information that don't require comments in > MachineInstrs. But the information has to be stored somewhere. Ugh. I just found another

On Monday 13 July 2009 11:40, Chris Lattner wrote: > > I was attempting to reduce the number of files affected, but if you > > want this change I'll go ahead and do it. > > Makes sense, thanks. Please do it as a separate patch from the other > changes though since it will be large and mechanical. Ok, no problem. > > - Tag instructons with source line information

On Sunday 12 July 2009 18:56, Chris Lattner wrote: > On Jul 10, 2009, at 3:05 PM, David Greene wrote: > > Here's the first of several patches to get comments into asm > > output. This one > > adds comment information to MachineInstructions and outputs it in the > > generated AsmPrinters. This includes TableGen work to trigger the > > comment > > output

On Jul 13, 2009, at 9:31 AM, David Greene wrote: >> A couple of things are important to discuss: >> >> + dynamic_cast<formatted_raw_ostream &>(O) << Comment(*c); >> >> We're trying to eliminate rtti, please don't add new uses of it. >> Switching all of the asmprinter to statically use >> formatted_raw_ostream would be

On Jul 13, 2009, at 10:02 AM, David Greene wrote: >>> - Tag instructons with source line information (customers really >>> want this). >> >> Right, that would be nice. This should be synthesizable from the >> DebugLoc on the instruction in the asm printer, no need to >> redundantly >> encode it into the comment field. > > Except the DebugLoc

On Monday 13 July 2009 13:13, Chris Lattner wrote: > > We're not going to submit our line number stuff anyway (it's too > > much of a > > hack) but we would like the comment infrastructure to be there. > > DebugLoc is there. The transition isn't complete at the LLVM IR > level, but it is at the MachineInstr level AFAIK. Well, the IR level is pretty

On Monday 13 July 2009 13:29, David Greene wrote: > I forgot about the LLVM instruction information. That's something that > can't be synthesized by the asmprinter. Again, we only emit some of this > with special debug flags so we don't carry the original IR around in > comments all the time. :) If the FI question can be answered (how do we know it's a spill slot)?

Here's the first of several patches to get comments into asm output. This one adds comment information to MachineInstructions and outputs it in the generated AsmPrinters. This includes TableGen work to trigger the comment output in the right places. Please review and comment. -Dave -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was

On Jul 10, 2009, at 3:05 PM, David Greene wrote: > Here's the first of several patches to get comments into asm > output. This one > adds comment information to MachineInstructions and outputs it in the > generated AsmPrinters. This includes TableGen work to trigger the > comment > output in the right places. A couple of things are important to discuss: +

Hello everyone, In the file *lib/CodeGen/AsmPrinter/AsmPrinter.cpp*, I would like to obtain an MCInst corresponding to its MachineInstr. Can anyone tell me a way to do that? If that is not possible, then, I would like to know if a given MachineInstr is an *lea *instruction and I would like to know if the symbol involved with this lea instruction is a jump-table. For instance, given a

Hi, I'd like to modify MachineBasicBlock contents within a MachineFunctionPass on the basis of how many CPU cycles the assembly instructions corresponding to the MBB take. I'm using the AVR backend and the number of CPU cycles every AVR assembly operation takes is openly available. Is there any straightforward way of getting the opcode mnemonics corresponding to a MachineInstr? I've

I'm trying to clone a MachineInstr in the AsmPrinter::EmitInstruction, Here is the code: void EsenciaAsmPrinter::EmitInstruction(const MachineInstr *MI) { const MachineFunction *MF = MI->getParent()->getParent(); MachineInstr *CloneMI = MF->CloneMachineInstr(MI); ... ... } The problem is that MF is a const and CloneMachineInstr expects a non-const. Does anybody know if there is

I know this is simple, but I want to be 100 percent sure I am doing this correctly. Would the following code be enough to add a simple unconditional branch instruction to a machine instruction? Do I need to set some key items in the MachineBasicBlock too? Is there more documentation on this subject? MachineBasicBlock * mbb = mf->CreateMachineBasicBlock( 0 ); mbb->getNumber();

On Tuesday 14 July 2009 15:35, David Greene wrote: > On Monday 13 July 2009 15:58, David Greene wrote: > > Again, after answering the FI stack slot question, the IR-level > > instruction information is the only thing we can't do through asmprinter. > > I'm open to other ways of capturing the information that don't require > > comments in MachineInstrs. But

On Jul 13, 2009, at 11:29 AM, David Greene wrote: > On Monday 13 July 2009 13:13, Chris Lattner wrote: > >>> We're not going to submit our line number stuff anyway (it's too >>> much of a >>> hack) but we would like the comment infrastructure to be there. >> >> DebugLoc is there. The transition isn't complete at the LLVM IR >> level,

Hello, I just wrote the code like this: BuildMI(BB, NM::CALL, 1) .addExternalSymbol(("_lvksda_control_marker_" + lexical_cast<string>(bb)).c_str()); and got some unexpected string in the assembler output. The problem is that when external symbol is added to MachineInstruction, MachineOperand is created with the char*

On 10/23/2012 1:58 PM, John Criswell wrote: > Dear All, > > I'm enhancing a MachineFunctionPass that enforces control-flow > integrity. One of the things I want to do is to set the alignment of > an instruction (by adding NOPs before it in the MachineBasicBlock or > by emitting an alignment directive to the assembler) if it causes a > specific sequence of bytes to be

Hello all, I am a LLVM newer who want to add a new backend(EBC) into LLVM. After coping the related files from another target and modifying it, I meet a problem when I build the project. The error message is as follows: ================================================================ [ 94%] Built target llvm-dis Linking CXX executable ../../bin/llvm-mc Undefined symbols: