similar to: [LLVMdev] How to build a llvm compiler backend for a specific target

Hi everyone, I am puzzled by several instruction defines in MSP430. 1 def MOV16rr : Pseudo<(outs GR16:$dst), (ins GR16:$src), "mov.w\t{$src, $dst}", [ ]>; Because it's an empty dag pattern[ ], by what does instuction selector select intruction 'MOV16rr'? 2 let canFoldAsLoad = 1, isReMaterializable = 1, mayHaveSideEffects =

Hi, 1. This instruction is not selected automatically by the instruction selector. The instruction combine / select stages insert registercopies, and they are expanded later on by the copyRegToReg() function provided by the MSP430InstrInfo to this MOV16rr. 2. ReMaterializable means there is no need to find a way to preserve the value in a register : the instruction can be just be reissued

Hi, I am writing you because I found in the LLVM site you have worked with backends. I am writing a new backend for a processor I am working on, because the compiler that comes with the processor design suite is really messy (it is CoSy). I want to have a power compiler like llvm. I read the "writing an LLVM compiler backend" and I have define almost all the files, but I have problems

Hello everyone, I want to generate machine code for target thumb, so run with bit code test.bc llc -march thumb test.bc -filetype obj -o test.o It doesn't generate test.o but show a message: "target doesn't support generation of this file type!" What's wrong? Thanks -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL:

According to your description i should not use the system libstdc++ and i need to specify the OTHER compiler libstdc++. But i don't where the OTHER compiler libstdc++ is. Is the OTHER compiler libstdc++ contained in llvm-2.5.tar.gz? if not where can i get it? 2009/10/20, Duncan Sands <baldrick at free.fr>: > > Hi Heyu Zhu, > > Then then the error is: >>

Hi everyone, It seems variable arguments is not support by mips backend in llvm-2.6. int func(int i, ...) { return 0; } llvm-gcc func.c -emit-llvm -c -O3 -o func.bc llc func.bc -relocation-model=static -march=mips -O0 -o func.s Command llc fails: llc:SelectionDAGBuilder.cpp:6440:void llvm::SelectionDAGISel::LowerArguments( llvm::BasicBlock):Assertion 'Invals.size() ==

Hi, When i make LLVM with llvm-2.5.tar.gz an error occurs. The step is below tar -zxvf llvm-2.5.tar.gz cd llvm-2.5-tar.gz make ENABLE_OPTIMIZED=1 Then then the error is: /tools/IUS611/tools/lib/libgcc_s.so.1: version `GCC_4.2.0' not found (required by /usr/lib/libstdc++.so.6) What shall i do to avoid it? I am a newbie, maybe it's a foolish question Regards -------------- next

Hi everyone The c code is like below extern int function_0(int, int); int main(){ return function_0(8, 9); } I compile it as below llvm-gcc main.c -emit-llvm -c -O3 -o main.bc llc main.bc -relocation-model=static -march=mips -O0 -o main.s It seems no argument is provided to function_0 ... addiu $sp, $sp, -8 sw $ra, 0($sp) jal function_0

Hi all, I'm trying to configure Nut to connect to an APC BackUPS Pro 900VA. This ups uses a serial port on which _simple_ or _smart_ signaling should be spoken. I've connected the UPS to a serial port using the original 940_0128A cable from APC. Unfortunately I've not yet managed to read any data from the ups. If I try to load the apcsmart driver it tells me that it cannot communicate

I have a fully functional wine install on my Ubuntu parition. However, I have two relitively recent partitions, my Arch and my Xubuntu installs. I have attempted to get wine to work with either of thse installations and I have had absolutely no luck. I have uninstalled wine competely. I have deleted my ~/.wine directory. I have compiled from source on both 32bit and 64bit systems. I have

Hi, On Wed, Feb 3, 2010 at 3:57 AM, Heyu Zhu <zhu.heyu at gmail.com> wrote: > Hi everyone, > > It seems variable arguments is not support by mips backend in llvm-2.6. > > int func(int i, ...) { >   return 0; > } > > llvm-gcc    func.c -emit-llvm -c  -O3   -o func.bc > llc    func.bc -relocation-model=static  -march=mips -O0  -o func.s > > Command llc

Hi Heyu Zhu, > I want to generate machine code for target thumb, so run > with bit code test.bc > > llc -march thumb test.bc -filetype obj -o test.o > > It doesn't generate test.o but show a message: > > "target doesn't support generation of this file type!" writing object code directly is not supported yet (though it is being worked on), so for

Hi Duncan, Is it to say llvm-2.5 has no assembler and linker for target thumb and llvm-2.5 can only generate assembler file for the time being? Thanks 2009/11/4, Duncan Sands <baldrick at free.fr>: > > Hi Heyu Zhu, > > I want to generate machine code for target thumb, so run >> with bit code test.bc >> llc -march thumb test.bc -filetype obj -o test.o >>

Hello all and thanks. I read here <https://mn3m.info/posts/configure-ups-monitor-using-nut-on-debian/> while searching around for my issue's resolution. In this I see that this nut driver is creating and using an entry in /dev (in this case ttyS0). So I "ll tty*" and see nothing with nut. Since this is a USB UPS, I suppose I should be looking for something in /dev/ttyUSB*.

Hi everyone, There are 16 GPRs in my RISC, but in fact GPR13 is read-only and connected to output of an A/D converter. It would be very convenient if i could bind a register variable with GPR13. Because i am a newbie i don't know how my llvm backend can support that. I plan to implement it as below. A. first declare a global variable in c-code int ADC asm("GPR13"); B. If

Hi Lang, In PBQPBuilderWithCoalescing::build, around line 360, we have code looking like: … PBQP::Vector newCosts(g.getNodeCosts(node)); addPhysRegCoalesce(newCosts, pregOpt, cBenefit); g.setNodeCosts(node, newCosts); … I suspect the leak occurs around the setNodeCosts method, and I have trouble understanding how it handles the case where the node already has costs. It seems to

Oooh. Neat. Thanks Dave. Please go ahead and commit that. Arnaud - I have no idea whether Dave's patch will help with this bug, but it's certainly worth testing. - Lang. On Wed, Sep 10, 2014 at 4:10 PM, David Blaikie <dblaikie at gmail.com> wrote: > While I'm not sure where the leak is, using some pre-canned memory > management might help... > > Attached is a

Hi Arnaud, Thanks for following up with that and sorry for the breakage. Couple of comments: MachineLoopInfo *MLI; + RegScavenger *RS; Would it make sense to use a unique_ptr here? That should eliminate the need of having explicit deletes. +; RUN: llc -mtriple=aarch64-linux-gnu -o - %s Add -enable-shrink-wrap=true and a second RUN line with -enable-shrink-wrap=false. Then add check lines

Hi all, The IndVarSimplify pass seems to be too aggressive when it enlarge the induction variable type ; this can pessimize the generated code when the new induction variable size is not natively supported by the target. This is probably not an issue for x86_64, which supports natively all types, but it is a real one for several embedded targets, with very few native types. I attached a patch to

Hi Lang, Thanks a lot for taking time to look into this. I will test the fix soon and let you know the results. Cheers, -- Arnaud de Grandmaison On Tuesday, April 03, 2012 17:30:33 Lang Hames wrote: > Hi Arnaud, > > Apologies for the delayed reply. > > Thank you for the excellent test case - it exposed a subtle bug in the > colorability heuristic. This has been fixed in