similar to: [LLVMdev] Instructions with register constraints

Hi all, I got a silly bug when compiling our project with the latest Clang. Here's the outputted assembly: > tst r3, #255 > strbeq r6, [r7] > ldreq r6, [r4, r6, lsl #2] > strne r6, [r7, #4] > ldr r6, [r4, r6, lsl #2] > bx r6 For the code to execute correctly, either the _ldr_ should be a _ldrne_ instruction or the _ldreq_ instruction should be removed. The error seems to

On 20 October 2017 at 09:24, Ingo Molnar <mingo at kernel.org> wrote: > > * Thomas Garnier <thgarnie at google.com> wrote: > >> Change the assembly code to use only relative references of symbols for the >> kernel to be PIE compatible. >> >> Position Independent Executable (PIE) support will allow to extended the >> KASLR randomization range below

On 20 October 2017 at 09:24, Ingo Molnar <mingo at kernel.org> wrote: > > * Thomas Garnier <thgarnie at google.com> wrote: > >> Change the assembly code to use only relative references of symbols for the >> kernel to be PIE compatible. >> >> Position Independent Executable (PIE) support will allow to extended the >> KASLR randomization range below

I've been playing around with llvm lately and I was wondering something about the bitcode instructions for basic arithmetic. Is there any plan to provide instructions that perform widening multiply, or add with carry? It might be written as: mulw i32 %lhs %rhs -> i64 ; widening multiply addw i32 %lhs %rhs -> i33 ; widening add addc i32 %lhs, i32 %rhs, i1 %c -> i33 ; add with carry

I've got an example where I think that there should be some loop-invariant optimization happening, but it's not. Here's the C code: #define DIM 8 #define UNROLL_DIM DIM typedef double InArray[DIM][DIM]; __declspec(noalias) void f1( InArray c, const InArray a, const InArray b ) { #pragma clang loop unroll_count(UNROLL_DIM) for( int i=0;i<DIM;i++) #pragma clang loop

I tried changing 'noalias' to 'restrict' in the code and I get: fma.c:17:12: warning: 'restrict' attribute only applies to return values that are pointers It seems like 'noalias' would be the correct attribute here, from the article you linked: "if a function is annotated as noalias, the optimizer can assume that, in addition to the parameters themselves,

fixes compilation issues with recent envytools, because movw was removed from fuc5, because it doesn't exist there anymore. The current code is most likely broken for fuc5 hardware as well and might have triggered all kinds of random memory reclocking fails. Changes in fuc3 binaries are tue do opcode optimizations using shorter opcodes when possible. Signed-off-by: Karol Herbst <kherbst

Change the assembly code to use only relative references of symbols for the kernel to be PIE compatible. Position Independent Executable (PIE) support will allow to extended the KASLR randomization range below the -2G memory limit. Signed-off-by: Thomas Garnier <thgarnie at google.com> --- arch/x86/crypto/aes-x86_64-asm_64.S | 45 ++++++++----- arch/x86/crypto/aesni-intel_asm.S

hello vorlon, got notified of your patch, will apply next days upstream unless some critiques are voiced on ml. thanks. -- maks ----- Forwarded message from Steve Langasek <steve.langasek at canonical.com> ----- Date: Wed, 16 Feb 2011 22:05:42 -0000 From: Steve Langasek <steve.langasek at canonical.com> Subject: [Bug 527720] Re: thumb2 porting issues identified: klibc uses

Hi to all the people again, I was writting a simply function in R, and wish to collect the results in a excel file. The work goes as follows, Ciervos<-function(K1, K0, A, R,M,Pi,Hembras) {B<-(K1-K0)/A T1<-(R*Pi*Hembras-M*Pi+B)/(Pi-M*Pi+R*Pi*Hembras) P1<-Pi-B R1<-P1*Hembras*R M1<-P1*M T2<-(R1-M1+B)/(P1-M1+R1) P2<-P1-B R2<-P2*Hembras*R M2<-P2*M

On Tuesday 05 August 2008 13:27, David Greene wrote: > Neither solution eliminates the need for instcombine to be careful and > consult masks from time to time. > > Perhaps I'm totally missing something. Concrete examples would be helpful. Ok, so I took my own advice and thought about CSE and instcombine a bit. I wrote the code by hand in a sort of pseudo-llvm language, so

I have a data frame like this: col1 col2 r1 2 1 r2 4 3 r3 6 5 r4 8 7 r5 10 9 r6 12 11 r7 14 13 r8 16 15 r9 18 17 r10 20 19 I want to modify this data frame, for example, assign every row in column col1 and col2 to -1 if the values in col1 is less than 12 and values in col2 is greater than 10. The result should look like this: col1

On Tue, Jan 26, 2016 at 12:16:09PM +0000, Will Deacon wrote: > On Mon, Jan 25, 2016 at 10:03:22PM -0800, Paul E. McKenney wrote: > > On Mon, Jan 25, 2016 at 04:42:43PM +0000, Will Deacon wrote: > > > On Fri, Jan 15, 2016 at 01:58:53PM -0800, Paul E. McKenney wrote: > > > > PPC Overlapping Group-B sets version 4 > > > > "" > > > > (*

On Tue, Jan 26, 2016 at 12:16:09PM +0000, Will Deacon wrote: > On Mon, Jan 25, 2016 at 10:03:22PM -0800, Paul E. McKenney wrote: > > On Mon, Jan 25, 2016 at 04:42:43PM +0000, Will Deacon wrote: > > > On Fri, Jan 15, 2016 at 01:58:53PM -0800, Paul E. McKenney wrote: > > > > PPC Overlapping Group-B sets version 4 > > > > "" > > > > (*

On Tue, 4 May 2004, Chris Lattner wrote: > On Tue, 4 May 2004, Chris Lattner wrote: > > I suspect that a large reason that LLVM does worst than a native C > > compiler with the CBE+GCC is that LLVM generates very low-level C code, > > and I'm not convinced that GCC is doing a very good job (ie, without > > syntactic loops). > > Yup, this is EXACTLY what is

In looking at the code in ARMConstantislandPass.cpp::optimizeThumb2JumpTables(), I see that there is the following condition for not creating tbb-based jump tables: // The instruction should be a tLEApcrel or t2LEApcrelJT; we want // to delete it as well. MachineInstr *LeaMI = PrevI; if ((LeaMI->getOpcode() != ARM::tLEApcrelJT &&

Sorry if this is a duplicate: I tried to send it last night and it didn't go through. I'm trimming some text to see if it helps. I have a simple program that fails on the Microblaze: int main() { unsigned long long x, y; x = 100; y = 0x8000000000000000ULL; return !(x > y); } As you can see, the test case compares two unsigned long long values. To try to track

Hi Paul, On Fri, Jan 15, 2016 at 09:39:12AM -0800, Paul E. McKenney wrote: > On Fri, Jan 15, 2016 at 09:55:54AM +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote: > > On Thu, Jan 14, 2016 at 01:29:13PM -0800, Paul E. McKenney wrote: > > > So smp_mb() provides transitivity, as do pairs of smp_store_release() > > > and smp_read_acquire(), > > > > But they provide different grades

Hi Paul, On Fri, Jan 15, 2016 at 09:39:12AM -0800, Paul E. McKenney wrote: > On Fri, Jan 15, 2016 at 09:55:54AM +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote: > > On Thu, Jan 14, 2016 at 01:29:13PM -0800, Paul E. McKenney wrote: > > > So smp_mb() provides transitivity, as do pairs of smp_store_release() > > > and smp_read_acquire(), > > > > But they provide different grades

On Mon, Jan 25, 2016 at 04:42:43PM +0000, Will Deacon wrote: > On Fri, Jan 15, 2016 at 01:58:53PM -0800, Paul E. McKenney wrote: > > On Fri, Jan 15, 2016 at 10:27:14PM +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote: > > > On Fri, Jan 15, 2016 at 09:46:12AM -0800, Paul E. McKenney wrote: > > > > On Fri, Jan 15, 2016 at 10:13:48AM +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote: > > > > >