similar to: [LLVMdev] Handling of IMPLICIT_DEF in llvm 2.7

Hi Bill, I am using the following version of BuildMI : MachineInstrBuilder BuildMI(MachineFunction &MF, const TargetInstrDesc &TID, unsigned DestReg) I do the following : void createInstrs(std::vector<MachineInstr *>& ilist) { Machine Instr *mi; mi = BuildMI(MF, someTID, somereg);

On Wed, Jun 3, 2009 at 5:10 PM, Manjunath Kudlur <keveman at gmail.com> wrote: > I am seeing the following assertion in leak detector. > > /llvm/lib/VMCore/LeakDetector.cpp:43: > void<unnamed>::LeakDetectorImpl<T>::addGarbage(const T*) [with T = > void]: Assertion `Ts.count(Cache) == 0 && "Object already in set!"' > failed. > > I am

On Jul 9, 2009, at 5:34 PM, David Greene wrote: > Can someone explain what MCInst is vs. MachineIntr? Sure. MCInst is designed to be part of the "MC" set of libraries, which is stuff dealing with machine code. We're building a suite of assemblers and disassemblers out of this. MCInst is integral to this plan. For an assembler you have two pieces: 1. "Recognize"

I am seeing the following assertion in leak detector. /llvm/lib/VMCore/LeakDetector.cpp:43: void<unnamed>::LeakDetectorImpl<T>::addGarbage(const T*) [with T = void]: Assertion `Ts.count(Cache) == 0 && "Object already in set!"' failed. I am creating a list of instructions using BuildMI() and adding them to a basic block using BB->insert(). I am seeing this

Hi I am not a good programmer but for my project i have to use llvm to generate CFG for c programs where i have a mapping from IR instruction in CFG to their respective c instruction. After surfing a in source of llvm i did the following change in printInstruction() function in llvm/lib/VMCore/AsmWriter.cpp file. .....void AssemblyWriter::printInstruction(const Instruction &I) { if

I am trying to JIT some code containing an indirect branch (and the corresponding store i8* blockaddress(@label)). I am using LLVM 2.7 code base. I build the ExecutionEngine using EngineBuilder, and call engine->getPointerToFunction(func). When I use setOptLevel(llvm::CodeGenOpt::None), the JITing fails with the following message : JIT.h:131: virtual void*

On Wed, Jun 3, 2009 at 12:46 PM, Manjunath Kudlur<keveman at gmail.com> wrote: > Hello, > > I am writing a MachineFunction pass that converts vector instructions > to a sequence of scalar instructions. Why? That really isn't the level you want to be doing that sort of thing normally. Usually, legalization turns illegal vector operations into legal scalar operations. -Eli

Hello, I am writing a MachineFunction pass that converts vector instructions to a sequence of scalar instructions. First, I go through the function and look for vector registers. For each vector register, I create a set of corresponding scalar registers using createVirtualRegister() function and put it in a map. Then I go through the function and replace vector instructions.The basic structure of

On Friday 10 July 2009 00:19, Chris Lattner wrote: > asmprinter::printInstruction will lower a MachineInstr to an MCInst, > then call the MCInst asmprinter to do the hard formatting work. You > can see a horrible simple skeleton of this idea in > X86ATTAsmPrinter::printMachineInstruction. Yep, that's where I hit the problem. I'm patching the sources for the comment emitter

I used llvm-stress to find a similar problem on x86-64. See http://llvm.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=12821. BTW, llvm-stress is a great tool! /Patrik Hägglund ________________________________ From: llvmdev-bounces at cs.uiuc.edu [mailto:llvmdev-bounces at cs.uiuc.edu] On Behalf Of Jakob Stoklund Olesen Sent: den 9 maj 2012 18:21 To: Jonas Paulsson Cc: llvmdev at cs.uiuc.edu Subject: Re: [LLVMdev]

On May 9, 2012, at 6:27 AM, Jonas Paulsson <jonas.paulsson at ericsson.com> wrote: > Hi, > > Recently code using IMPLICIT_DEF and INSERT_SUBREG started to break: > > %vreg9<def> = IMPLICIT_DEF > %vreg10<def> = INSERT_SUBREG %vreg9<kill>, %vreg1<kill>, hi > %vreg12<def> = sub %vreg10<kill>,

Hi, I'm implementing the built_vector as an IMPLICIT_DEF followed by INSERT_SUBREGs. This approach is the one of the SPARC architecture. def : Pat<(build_vector (f32 fpimm:$a1), (f32 fpimm:$a2)), (INSERT_SUBREG(INSERT_SUBREG (v2f32 (IMPLICIT_DEF)), (i32 (COPY_TO_REGCLASS (MOVSUTO_A_iSLo (bitcast_fpimm_to_i32 f32:$a1)), FPUaOffsetClass)), A_UNIT_PART),

Hi, Recently code using IMPLICIT_DEF and INSERT_SUBREG started to break: %vreg9<def> = IMPLICIT_DEF %vreg10<def> = INSERT_SUBREG %vreg9<kill>, %vreg1<kill>, hi %vreg12<def> = sub %vreg10<kill>, %vreg11<kill> => %vreg10<def> = IMPLICIT_DEF %vreg10:hi<def> = COPY %vreg1<kill>

Manjunath, I had a very similar problem and I solved it using a custom vector shuffle and addition instead of mov. For example, Vector_shuffle s1, s2, <0,3> is mapped to a custom instruction where I transform the swizzle to a 32bit integer mask and an inverted mask. So I have dst, src0, src1, imm1, imm2 And I have my asm look similar to: Add dst, src0.imm1, src1.imm2 and then in the asm

Hi, I have a MachineInstr that writes to a subreg, but clobbers the superreg. How should I BuildMI this instruction? I try to do a IMPLICIT_DEF super_reg and then write to a subreg of that super register , but it gets DCE:ed. Is there a way to express this clobbering of a superregister? thanks, Jonas -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was

Christian, Thanks for your reply and the wiki entry. I did search the archives, but evidently I didn't search for the right thing. My bad. Anyways, I am still wondering about the other part of my question. Why aren't there Tablegen backends specific to some architecture backends? Let me describe a different scenario. Suppose my architecture has vector and scalar units, and suppose I want

Dan, Thanks a lot. Using a modifier in the assembly string works for this case. I am trying to solve a related problem. I am trying to print out a set of "mov" ops for the vector_shuffle node. Since the source of the "mov" is from one of the sources to vector_shuffle, depending on the mask, I am not sure what assembly string to emit. For example, if I have d <-

Hi, I tried creating intrinsics which are to be placeholders for a set of instructions which should not be executed by the backend. I want to retain only intrinsic,phi and terminator instructions in a basic block. I have taken care of the external dependencies of basic block. How do I delete the rest of the instructions? Thank You Aditya P.S:

On 4/12/2018 8:01 AM, Dominique Torette via llvm-dev wrote: > > But there is one small issue in the inference of RegisterClass of the > implicitly defined register. > > As shown below, the %vreg6<def> is implicitly defined as FPUabRegisterClass. > > This register class accepts the v2f32 type, but for others addressing > mode context this register should be

I'm looking at extending AsmPrinter to pretty-print comments after instructions (I'm adding the necessary fields to MachineInstr to do this). I'm trying to grok AsmWriterEmitter and having a tough go of it. I look at X86GenAsmWriter1.inc (the Intel syntax writer) and understand that there's a case block for printing operands under several switch statements, one per