similar to: [LLVMdev] Disabling emission of jump table info

Displaying 20 results from an estimated 6000 matches similar to: "[LLVMdev] Disabling emission of jump table info"

2010 Mar 01
0
[LLVMdev] Disabling emission of jump table info
On 23/02/10 14:58, Richard Osborne wrote: > I've recently changed the XCore target to implement BR_JT as a jump to a > series jumps. The jump table entries are expand inline in the function > so there is no longer a need to emit jump tables at the end of the > function. However the emission of jump tables at the end of a function > is done inside the AsmPrinter base class and
2010 Mar 10
2
[LLVMdev] Disabling emission of jump table info
Typo "responisbility", otherwise looks great to me, please apply. For ARM, please just file a bugzilla suggesting that the ARM backend adopt this. Thanks Richard! -Chris On Mar 9, 2010, at 6:06 AM, Richard Osborne wrote: > On 02/03/10 00:11, Jim Grosbach wrote: >> On Mar 1, 2010, at 4:09 PM, Richard Osborne wrote: >> >>> On 01/03/10 21:14, Chris Lattner
2010 Mar 11
0
[LLVMdev] Disabling emission of jump table info
Thanks for reviewing this. Committed in r98255 and r98256. The bug against the ARM backend is 6581: http://llvm.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=6581 On 10/03/10 21:45, Chris Lattner wrote: > Typo "responisbility", otherwise looks great to me, please apply. For ARM, please just file a bugzilla suggesting that the ARM backend adopt this. Thanks Richard! > > -Chris > > On Mar
2010 Mar 09
0
[LLVMdev] Disabling emission of jump table info
On 02/03/10 00:11, Jim Grosbach wrote: > On Mar 1, 2010, at 4:09 PM, Richard Osborne wrote: > >> On 01/03/10 21:14, Chris Lattner wrote: >> >>> On Mar 1, 2010, at 10:52 AM, Richard Osborne wrote: >>> >>>> On 23/02/10 14:58, Richard Osborne wrote: >>>> >>>> >>>>> I've recently
2010 Mar 01
2
[LLVMdev] Disabling emission of jump table info
On Mar 1, 2010, at 10:52 AM, Richard Osborne wrote: > On 23/02/10 14:58, Richard Osborne wrote: >> I've recently changed the XCore target to implement BR_JT as a jump to a >> series jumps. The jump table entries are expand inline in the function >> so there is no longer a need to emit jump tables at the end of the >> function. However the emission of jump tables at
2010 Mar 02
2
[LLVMdev] Disabling emission of jump table info
On Mar 1, 2010, at 4:09 PM, Richard Osborne wrote: > On 01/03/10 21:14, Chris Lattner wrote: >> On Mar 1, 2010, at 10:52 AM, Richard Osborne wrote: >> >>> On 23/02/10 14:58, Richard Osborne wrote: >>> >>>> I've recently changed the XCore target to implement BR_JT as a jump to a >>>> series jumps. The jump table entries are
2010 Mar 02
0
[LLVMdev] Disabling emission of jump table info
On 01/03/10 21:14, Chris Lattner wrote: > On Mar 1, 2010, at 10:52 AM, Richard Osborne wrote: > >> On 23/02/10 14:58, Richard Osborne wrote: >> >>> I've recently changed the XCore target to implement BR_JT as a jump to a >>> series jumps. The jump table entries are expand inline in the function >>> so there is no longer a need to emit jump
2020 Mar 11
2
XCore target
Hello all. At XMOS we are working towards updating the upstream XCore backend for newer versions of the chip. XCore is the XMOS processor. The XCore backend was written by Richard Osborne at XMOS. Richard has moved on. The current code owner in CODE_OWNERS.TXT, Robert Lytton, has also moved on. For some years XMOS has developed the compiler in-house, for new versions of the chip, but not
2009 Oct 20
2
[LLVMdev] No DWARF line number info with HasDotLocAndDotFile = true
It seems to me that emitting DWARF line number information using .loc directives is currently broken. CellSPU is currently the only in tree target that sets HasDotLocAndDotFile in its MCAsmInfo and I can't get it to produce any line number information. Is this a known issue? I understand that there are lots of changes going on in this area. Any idea what it would take to fix? -- Richard
2009 Jan 15
2
[LLVMdev] Possible bug in LiveIntervals (triggered on the XCore target)?
Hi Richard, Thanks for working on this! Your patched solved my initial problem, but introduced another one. Please find attached another BC file that fails on xcore with the linear scan regalloc. This is the error message I get eliminateFrameIndex Frame size too big: -3 0 llc 0x08affd1e 1 libc.so.6 0xb7d35a01 abort + 257 2 llc 0x081a0972
2009 Jan 14
0
[LLVMdev] Possible bug in LiveIntervals (triggered on the XCore target)?
Chris Lattner wrote: > On Jan 14, 2009, at 3:14 AM, Richard Osborne wrote: > > >>> Evan >>> >> OK, that make sense, I'll take a look at changing this. I've added a >> bug >> for the issue: >> >> http://llvm.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=3324 >> >> There is currently no Backend: XCore component in bugzilla so
2009 Jan 14
2
[LLVMdev] Possible bug in LiveIntervals (triggered on the XCore target)?
On Jan 13, 2009, at 11:20 AM, Richard Osborne <richard at xmos.com> wrote: > Roman Levenstein wrote: >> Hi again, >> >> Now, after I fixed the graph coloring regalloc bug that was triggered >> by the ARM target, I continue testing and found another bug, this >> time >> on the XCore target. First I thought that it is again specific to my >>
2012 Sep 06
3
[LLVMdev] Preferred alignment of globals > 16bytes
I recently noticed that all globals bigger than 16 bytes are being 16 byte aligned by LLVM (assuming there isn't an explicitly requested alignment). I'd really rather avoid this, at least for the XCore backend. I tracked this down to the following code in TargetData.cpp: if (GV->hasInitializer() && GVAlignment == 0) { if (Alignment < 16) { // If the global
2009 Jan 13
0
[LLVMdev] Possible bug in LiveIntervals (triggered on the XCore target)?
Roman Levenstein wrote: > Hi again, > > Now, after I fixed the graph coloring regalloc bug that was triggered > by the ARM target, I continue testing and found another bug, this time > on the XCore target. First I thought that it is again specific to my > register allocator, but it seems to be trigerred also by LLVM's > linearscan register allocator. > > I don't
2011 Oct 10
2
[LLVMdev] Expected behavior of eliminateFrameIndex() on dbg_value machine instructions
I'm investigating a bug associated with debug information that manifests itself in the XCore backend (PR11105). I'd like to understand what the expected behavior of eliminateFrameIndex() is when it is called on a dbg_value machine instruction. Currently the XCore target replaces the frame index with the frame register and sets the next operand to the byte offset from the frame
2009 Oct 20
0
[LLVMdev] No DWARF line number info with HasDotLocAndDotFile = true
Richard Osborne wrote: > It seems to me that emitting DWARF line number information using .loc > directives is currently broken. CellSPU is currently the only in tree > target that sets HasDotLocAndDotFile in its MCAsmInfo and I can't get it > to produce any line number information. > I think I understand why this is happening. Since HasDotLocAndDotFile is set the
2009 Jan 14
2
[LLVMdev] Possible bug in LiveIntervals (triggered on the XCore target)?
On Jan 14, 2009, at 3:14 AM, Richard Osborne wrote: >> Evan > OK, that make sense, I'll take a look at changing this. I've added a > bug > for the issue: > > http://llvm.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=3324 > > There is currently no Backend: XCore component in bugzilla so I've put > it under new-bugs. Could someone add this component for me. Added. You
2009 Jan 15
0
[LLVMdev] Possible bug in LiveIntervals (triggered on the XCore target)?
Roman Levenstein wrote: > Hi Richard, > > Thanks for working on this! Your patched solved my initial problem, > but introduced another one. Please find attached another BC file that > fails on xcore with the linear scan regalloc. > > This is the error message I get > eliminateFrameIndex Frame size too big: -3 > 0 llc 0x08affd1e > 1 libc.so.6 0xb7d35a01 abort
2012 Sep 06
0
[LLVMdev] Preferred alignment of globals > 16bytes
On Sep 6, 2012, at 8:51 AM, Richard Osborne <richard at xmos.com> wrote: > I recently noticed that all globals bigger than 16 bytes are being 16 byte aligned by LLVM (assuming there isn't an explicitly requested alignment). I'd really rather avoid this, at least for the XCore backend. I tracked this down to the following code in TargetData.cpp: > > if
2011 Sep 14
3
[LLVMdev] Handling of DebugLocs during CSE of SelectionDAG nodes.
On 13/09/11 17:40, Devang Patel wrote: > On Sep 13, 2011, at 4:01 AM, Kyriakos Georgiou wrote: >> I've been investigating a case with the XCore target (which doesn't use >> FastISel) where the DWARF line number emitted at -O0 results in the xgdb >> visiting source lines in an unexpected order. I've tracked down the >> problem to the handling of DebugLocs in