similar to: [LLVMdev] spilling question

thanks for the help ..I could build it with cmake generated project files Being a newbie with cmake one question, is it equivalent to configure in windows environment and so would need to be run everytime I change the source location ? thanks shrey On Wed, Oct 28, 2009 at 4:31 PM, shreyas krishnan <shreyas76 at gmail.com> wrote: > done > >

done http://llvm.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=5331 shrey On Wed, Oct 28, 2009 at 3:29 PM, Óscar Fuentes <ofv at wanadoo.es> wrote: > shreyas krishnan <shreyas76 at gmail.com> writes: > >>     I am running into bunch of windows build issues. Can someone >> please provide help on what might be going wrong >> >> >>

Hi I am running into bunch of windows build issues. Can someone please provide help on what might be going wrong llvm\win32\Configure\..\llvm\ADT\hash_set.h 1>The system cannot find the file specified. Similarly 2>c1xx : fatal error C1083: Cannot open source file: '..\..\lib\Support\Annotation.cpp': No such file or directory thanks in advance shrey

Thanks Eli, Jaffrey for the pointer! A couple of further questions if I may 1. Isnt this assuming that register being pinned to is always esi when it comes to using a calling convention. I would like to pin the register through a pass and so I dont know which registers ends up being used for a particular value before hand 2. I would also like to allocate some small aggregates into registers. I

Hello, I'm getting an assertion in register allocator, specifically in LiveIntervalAnalysis.h, method LiveIntervals::getInstructionIndex: unsigned getInstructionIndex(MachineInstr* instr) const { Mi2IndexMap::const_iterator it = mi2iMap_.find(instr); assert(it != mi2iMap_.end() && "Invalid instruction!"); return it->second; } The crash happens

I tried adding them in my backend however I run into the assertion assert((unsigned)VT.SimpleTy < sizeof(LoadExtActions[0])*4 && ExtType < array_lengthof(LoadExtActions) && "Table isn't big enough!"); What does the assertion mean ? thanks for all help!! shrey On Wed, Jul 14, 2010 at 6:56 PM, Eli Friedman <eli.friedman at

Hi As part of a requirement that I have, I would like to have some globals reside in registers always. So these variables would not have a home location in memory. I realize the code generated would also need to be aware of this. I do have some ideas on how to change the code appropriately. But right now, I am more concerned about how to fit this requirement (sort of interprocedural) into the

Hi I run into an issue as part of splitting a critical edge during LICM. When a new basic block is created and needs to be added into the dominator tree, the block is already in the dominator tree. I print the dominator tree and I see it is added into the tree as child of node it is supposed to dominate. How do I debug to find out why/when its getting added into the tree. ? Tips/suggestions on

Chris recently wrote up a way to do this at http://nondot.org/sabre/LLVMNotes/GlobalRegisterVariables.txt On Thu, Jul 16, 2009 at 1:53 PM, shreyas krishnan<shreyas76 at gmail.com> wrote: > Hi >   As part of a requirement that I have, I would like to have some > globals reside in registers always. So these variables would not have > a home location in memory. > I realize the

Hi I find types such as v16i32, v16f32 missing in my llvm version 2.7 So does the following page not list them http://llvm.org/docs/doxygen/html/classllvm_1_1MVT.html is that intentional for any reason or can I just add them ? thanks shrey

Hi all I am building LLVM 2.6 on VC++. I am running into this problem where even builds without any changes whatsoever causes rebuilding of certain directories like table gen of intrinsics and x86 target files. This then leads to build of the x86 codegen. Is this expected ? Any pointers to how I can avoid this? thanks shrey

I am sorry, I actually meant Machine Instructions - is there a way ? One use of that is I would like to be able to group instructions together and be able check their group quickly. thanks shrey On Sun, Aug 14, 2011 at 1:16 AM, Bill Wendling <wendling at apple.com> wrote: > On Aug 13, 2011, at 11:04 AM, shreyas krishnan wrote: > >> Hi >>    Is there a way to associate

Thanks Eli ...I actually did that ..bumped it up by 2 that I had added. Any thing else that I might have done wrong ? I can see a different assert where it clearly depends on LAST_VALUETYPE assert((unsigned)VT.SimpleTy < MVT::LAST_VALUETYPE thanks shrey On Fri, Jul 16, 2010 at 5:20 PM, Eli Friedman <eli.friedman at gmail.com> wrote: > On Fri, Jul 16, 2010 at 5:14 PM, shreyas

Hi if I have group of instructions that belong to same basic block, how can I determine which of these occurs the last ? thanks Shrey

On Thu, 21 Jun 2007, Fernando Magno Quintao Pereira wrote: > I would like to make a suggestion. In the LiveIntervalAnalysis class, > instead of numbering the instructions in the order in which basic blocks > are stored in the machine function, use the df_ext_iterator. It will order > the instruction according to the dominance tree (or it seems to be doing > so). There are many

Nice idea. Please also try using SmallPtrSet (with a sufficiently large size) instead of std::set for traversal after everything is working. Using std::set can really hurt compile time in case of large basic block numbers. Is there a way to dynamically adjust "SmallSize" based on number of basic blocks in the function? Evan On Jun 21, 2007, at 10:20 PM, Fernando Magno Quintao

Hi I am running into a legalize dag issue after custom lowering a load. If someone can give me pointers that would be great. I am using llvm 2.6 When custom lowering a load, the following code gets executed. Tmp1 = TLI.LowerOperation(Tmp3, DAG); if (Tmp1.getNode()) { Tmp3 = LegalizeOp(Tmp1); Tmp4 = LegalizeOp(Tmp1.getValue(1)); <----------------- what

Hi I would like to add transformation - mostly peephole- after register allocation that make use of def-use information. Would it be possible to make use of the dag codebase to help do that ? thanks for any pointers shrey

thanks for the help ..I do add the chain and the result. My code is like this ... SDValue Ops[] = { load->getChain(), load->getOperand(1), load->getBasePtr(), des }; DAG.getNode(CustomOpc, NodeTys, Ops, 4); thanks again! shrey On Thu, Nov 12, 2009 at 4:41 PM, Anton Korobeynikov <anton at korobeynikov.info> wrote: >> My problem is that the second call asserts inside

hi I find machine register info carrying the lists of def use for each register - PhysRegUseDefLists[RegNo];. I dont see a lot of places using this. For instance, if this list is accurate, can this be used for def use relationships at different points? thanks shrey