similar to: [LLVMdev] PIC16 question

Chris Lattner wrote: > In my ongoing work on refactoring the asmprinters, I've found that > PIC16 doesn't put ':' after labels in some cases. Specifically, it > looks like basic block labels are emitted without a ':': > > movwf @__floatunsidf.frame. + 2 > movlp .BB1_2 > goto .BB1_2 > .BB1_2

On Thu, 2008-10-23 at 11:17 -0700, Evan Cheng wrote: > > On Oct 22, 2008, at 11:09 AM, Sanjiv.Gupta at microchip.com wrote: > > > In our case, storeRegToStackSlot, loadRegFromStackSlot clobbers some > > other physical register which may be holding a live value used > > somewhere else. How do I make regalloc aware so that it saves the > > value before

Hi, Chris > That is target independent code, so you should not put sparc specific changes there.  It sounds like one of the sparc-specific target hooks is wrong. Since sparc does not provide any hooks for operation of branches (e.g. AnalyzeBranch and friends) it might be possible that generic codegen code is broken in absence of these hooks. -- With best regards, Anton Korobeynikov Faculty

I'm building this with llvm-c, and accessing these intrinsics via calling the intrinsic as if it were a function. class F_SREG<string OpStr, NVPTXRegClass regclassOut, Intrinsic IntOp> : NVPTXInst<(outs regclassOut:$dst), (ins), OpStr, [(set regclassOut:$dst, (IntOp))]>; def INT_PTX_SREG_TID_X : F_SREG<"mov.u32 \t$dst, %tid.x;",

Ok, as I said, the most precise way to figure out what's wrong is to emit LLVM IR first (use clang -emit-llvm ...) and check out how it differs from working examples, for instance, nvptx regression tests. ----- Original message ----- > I'm building this with llvm-c, and accessing these intrinsics via calling > the intrinsic as if it were a function. > > class F_SREG<string

Hi Timothy, I'm not sure what you mean by this working for other intrinsics, but in this case, I think you want the intrinsic name llvm.nvvm.read.ptx.sreg.tid.x. For me, this looks like: %x = call i32 @llvm.nvvm.read.ptx.sreg.tid.x() Pete On Fri, Mar 1, 2013 at 11:51 AM, Timothy Baldridge <tbaldridge at gmail.com> wrote: > I'm building this with llvm-c, and accessing these

On Oct 22, 2008, at 11:09 AM, Sanjiv.Gupta at microchip.com wrote: > In our case, storeRegToStackSlot, loadRegFromStackSlot clobbers some > other physical register which may be holding a live value used > somewhere else. How do I make regalloc aware so that it saves the > value before storeRegToStackSlot and make it available again at the > point of earlier use? >

In our case, storeRegToStackSlot, loadRegFromStackSlot clobbers some other physical register which may be holding a live value used somewhere else. How do I make regalloc aware so that it saves the value before storeRegToStackSlot and make it available again at the point of earlier use? TIA, Sanjiv -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL:

The identifier INT_PTX_SREG_TID_X is the name of an instruction as the back-end sees it, and has very little to do with the name you should use in your IR. Your best bet is to look at the include/llvm/IR/IntrinsicsNVVM.td file and see the definitions for each intrinsic. Then, the name mapping is just: int_foo_bar -> llvm.foo.bar() int_ prefix becomes llvm., and all underscores turn into

On 11/12/2009, at 10:43 AM, Anton Korobeynikov wrote: > Hi, Chris > >> That is target independent code, so you should not put sparc specific changes there. It sounds like one of the sparc-specific target hooks is wrong. > Since sparc does not provide any hooks for operation of branches (e.g. > AnalyzeBranch and friends) it might be possible that generic codegen > code is

I've written a compiler that outputs PTX code, the result seems fairly reasonable, but I'm not sure the intrinsics are getting compiled correctly. In addition, when I try load the module using CUDA, I get an error: CUDA_ERROR_NO_BINARY_FOR_GPU. I'm running this on a 2012 MBP with a 640M GPU. PTX Code (for a mandelbrot calculation): // // Generated by LLVM NVPTX Back-End //

Timothy, Those calls to compute grid intrinsics are definitely wrong. In ptx code they should end up into reading special registers, rather than function calls. Try to take some working example and figure out the LLVM IR differences between it and the result of your compiler. - D. ----- Original message ----- > I've written a compiler that outputs PTX code, the result seems fairly >

Hello, I am new here. This is my first post. I spent about three days on trying out LLVM by developing a front-end which is able to generate LLVM IR for a subset of C language. I have not applied any optimization pass yet. On linux, it can go all the way through with the system native assemlber and linker to generate executables. And it runs. I ran into problems on Windows since the generated

It looks like createCFGSimplificationPass was disabled on 2006/09/04. This causes some problems for architectures that use conditional moves to implement select (alpha and ARM). For example, on 2006/09/03 a "if (a) return 0; else return 1;" compiled to ---------------------------------------- zapnot $17,15,$1 zapnot $16,15,$2 bis $31,$31,$0 cmpeq $2,$1,$1

I am currently able to emit jump tables, but I cannot use then because I cant figure out how to add its address to the constant pool. For example, if I have the jump table ------------------------------------- .JTI1_0: .word .BB1_6 .word .BB1_7 .word .BB1_1 .word .BB1_2 ------------------------------------- the address ".JTI1_0" must be in a

Hello guys, I'm writing a pass that must check every machine instruction that will go to assembly. I've put my pass registration just before the "addAsmEmmiter" line in LLVMTargetMachine.cpp But, iterating trought machine functions and basic blocks inside the functions, there are still machine instructions that I cant reach. This is the beginnig of the asm output of my example

Hi, I would like some help regarding the LSR pass. It seems that it likes to duplicate address calculations as in the case above, which is highly undesirable on my target. I wonder if there is any way to tell LSR to not duplicate the code in cases like this? Or could I perhaps run CSE after LSR again? What is the logic behind this transformation? It seems that a LSR pass should not insert a

Ok. Let me describe the problem again in some detail. The following is the original bitcode from a real testcase: bb7: %46 = load i32* %j, align 4 %47 = add nsw i32 %46, 1 store i32 %47, i32* %j, align 4 br label %bb8 To protect the operand of the store I duplicate the input chain of operands and insert a comparison to check whether the operand of the stores are correct. As a result of

On Jun 29, 2010, at 7:08 AM, ether zhhb wrote: > > why computeSCEVAtScope not try to get the operands in the current > scope like the function do with SCEVCommutativeExpr, like: > > if (const SCEVAddRecExpr *AddRec = dyn_cast<SCEVAddRecExpr>(V)) { > if (!L || !AddRec->getLoop()->contains(L)) { > ... > // Then, evaluate the AddRec. >

hi all, i have SCEVAddRec {{(32 + @edge.8265),+,32}<Loop0>,+,4}<Loop1> where Loop0 and Loop1 are brothers (loops at the same level of the loopnest), and Loop0 have a computable backedge taken count. when i call getSCEVAtScope({{(32 + @edge.8265),+,32}<Loop0>,+,4}<Loop1> , Loop1), it just give me a {{(32 + @edge.8265),+,32}<Loop0>,+,4}<Loop1>, instead of