similar to: [LLVMdev] SDTypeProfile with negative number of operands

Displaying 20 results from an estimated 600 matches similar to: "[LLVMdev] SDTypeProfile with negative number of operands"

2008 Jul 10
2
[LLVMdev] Implementing llvm.atomic.cmp.swap.i32 on PowerPC
Cool, that worked. New patch attached... Cheers, Gary Evan Cheng wrote: > Just cast both values to const TargetRegisterClass*. > > Evan > > On Jul 10, 2008, at 7:36 AM, Gary Benson wrote: > > Evan Cheng wrote: > > > How about? > > > > > > const TargetRegisterClass *RC = is64Bit ? &PPC:GPRCRegClass : > > > &PPC:G8RCRegClass; >
2011 Jun 08
3
[LLVMdev] cmake and testsuite
I just tried cmake for the first time and it mostly worked. I had been using autotools to configure. With cmake configure environment when I try to do: make TESTSUITE=CodeGen/mblaze check it runs the whole test suite. Under autotools it would just run the mblaze tests. Is there an equivalent command in a camke configured environment or is this broken? I know nothing about cmake so I'm
2010 Nov 08
2
[LLVMdev] Creating tablegen patterns for intrinsics with no return value.
I have intrinsic with no return value and I need to match them to machine instructions. If the instruction has a return value I am able to correctly match it, but if I try to create some tablegen code that has no return value, the instruction gets deleted. Here is my profile/node/pattern. Profile: def SDTIL_BinAtomNoRet : SDTypeProfile<0, 3, [ SDTCisPtrTy<0>, SDTCisVT<1, i32>,
2013 Apr 12
1
[LLVMdev] Problem with Store of i8 in a global address
Hi, I am creating a new backend for a custom microcontroller. In order to create the backend I am modifying from Mips backend. My architecture has a store instruction with direct address mode. It accepts two arguments: source register and address (immediate). This instruction is not available in Mips, but it is in Hexagon, so I copied from Hexagon the following, adapting it to my registers: -
2008 Jul 08
0
[LLVMdev] Implementing llvm.atomic.cmp.swap.i32 on PowerPC
PPCTargetLowering::EmitInstrWithCustomInserter has a reference to the current MachineFunction for other purposes. Can you use MachineFunction::getRegInfo instead? Dan On Jul 8, 2008, at 1:56 PM, Gary Benson wrote: > Would it be acceptable to change MachineInstr::getRegInfo from private > to public so I can use it from > PPCTargetLowering::EmitInstrWithCustomInserter? > >
2008 Jul 11
0
[LLVMdev] Implementing llvm.atomic.cmp.swap.i32 on PowerPC
Hi Gary, This does not patch cleanly for me (PPCISelLowering.cpp). Can you prepare a updated patch? Thanks, Evan On Jul 10, 2008, at 11:45 AM, Gary Benson wrote: > Cool, that worked. New patch attached... > > Cheers, > Gary > > Evan Cheng wrote: >> Just cast both values to const TargetRegisterClass*. >> >> Evan >> >> On Jul 10, 2008, at 7:36
2008 Jul 10
0
[LLVMdev] Implementing llvm.atomic.cmp.swap.i32 on PowerPC
Just cast both values to const TargetRegisterClass*. Evan On Jul 10, 2008, at 7:36 AM, Gary Benson wrote: > Evan Cheng wrote: >> How about? >> >> const TargetRegisterClass *RC = is64Bit ? &PPC:GPRCRegClass : >> &PPC:G8RCRegClass; >> unsigned TmpReg = RegInfo.createVirtualRegister(RC); > > I tried something like that yesterday: > > const
2008 Jul 10
2
[LLVMdev] Implementing llvm.atomic.cmp.swap.i32 on PowerPC
Evan Cheng wrote: > How about? > > const TargetRegisterClass *RC = is64Bit ? &PPC:GPRCRegClass : > &PPC:G8RCRegClass; > unsigned TmpReg = RegInfo.createVirtualRegister(RC); I tried something like that yesterday: const TargetRegisterClass *RC = is64bit ? &PPC::GPRCRegClass : &PPC::G8RCRegClass; but I kept getting this error no matter how I arranged it:
2008 Jun 30
0
[LLVMdev] Implementing llvm.atomic.cmp.swap.i32 on PowerPC
You need to insert new basic blocks and update CFG to accomplish this. There is a hackish way to do this right now. Add a pseudo instruction to represent this operation and mark it usesCustomDAGSchedInserter. This means the intrinsic is mapped to a single (pseudo) node. But it is then expanded into instructions that can span multiple basic blocks. See
2008 Jul 08
2
[LLVMdev] Implementing llvm.atomic.cmp.swap.i32 on PowerPC
Would it be acceptable to change MachineInstr::getRegInfo from private to public so I can use it from PPCTargetLowering::EmitInstrWithCustomInserter? Cheers, Gary Evan Cheng wrote: > Look for createVirtualRegister. These are examples in > PPCISelLowering.cpp. > > Evan > On Jul 8, 2008, at 8:24 AM, Gary Benson wrote: > > > Hi Evan, > > > > Evan Cheng wrote:
2008 Jun 30
2
[LLVMdev] Implementing llvm.atomic.cmp.swap.i32 on PowerPC
Chris Lattner wrote: > On Jun 27, 2008, at 8:27 AM, Gary Benson wrote: > > def CMP_UNRESw : Pseudo<(outs), (ins GPRC:$rA, GPRC:$rB, i32imm: > > $label), > > "cmpw $rA, $rB\n\tbne- La${label}_exit", > > [(PPCcmp_unres GPRC:$rA, GPRC:$rB, imm: > > $label)]>; > > } > > > > ...and
2010 Nov 08
0
[LLVMdev] Creating tablegen patterns for intrinsics with no return value.
On Nov 8, 2010, at 10:32 AM, Villmow, Micah wrote: > I have intrinsic with no return value and I need to match them to machine instructions. If the instruction has a return value I am able to correctly match it, but if I try to create some tablegen code that has no return value, the instruction gets deleted. Hi Micah, >From your description it sounds like machine dead code elimination is
2011 Jun 29
1
[LLVMdev] llvm-ld and native executables
Does llvm-ld support linker scripts or have a mechanism for specifying where sections should be loaded? It's unclear to me what the -native option really does. Is llvm-ld intended to be a full replacement for ld? Thanks, JP
2017 Sep 19
1
Changes to 'ADJCALLSTACK*' and 'callseq_*' between LLVM v4.0 and v5.0
Hi Serge, Thanks for your help. I have looked at the change log, and so far as I can tell, my implementation is pretty much identical to all of the in-tree targets, but I’m missing something and can’t see what it is. I have simplified my TD description to just: def MyCallseqStart : SDNode<"ISD::CALLSEQ_START", SDCallSeqStart<[SDTCisVT<0, i32>,
2010 Nov 08
1
[LLVMdev] Creating tablegen patterns for intrinsics with no return value.
> -----Original Message----- > From: Jim Grosbach [mailto:grosbach at apple.com] > Sent: Monday, November 08, 2010 10:41 AM > To: Villmow, Micah > Cc: LLVM Developers Mailing List > Subject: Re: [LLVMdev] Creating tablegen patterns for intrinsics with > no return value. > > > On Nov 8, 2010, at 10:32 AM, Villmow, Micah wrote: > > > I have intrinsic with no
2008 Jul 11
2
[LLVMdev] Implementing llvm.atomic.cmp.swap.i32 on PowerPC
Hi Evan, Evan Cheng wrote: > This does not patch cleanly for me (PPCISelLowering.cpp). Can you > prepare a updated patch? This should work, though I won't have access to my test box now until next Thursday so no guarantees :) Cheers, Gary -- http://gbenson.net/ -------------- next part -------------- Index: lib/Target/PowerPC/PPCISelLowering.h
2008 Jul 09
2
[LLVMdev] Implementing llvm.atomic.cmp.swap.i32 on PowerPC
Ah, didn't see that, that's what comes of trying to do something at 5pm :) I attached an updated patch which creates a virtual register instead of using R0. How does this look? Cheers, Gary Dan Gohman wrote: > PPCTargetLowering::EmitInstrWithCustomInserter has a reference > to the current MachineFunction for other purposes. Can you use > MachineFunction::getRegInfo instead?
2016 Jan 07
2
TableGen error message: top-level forms in instruction pattern should have void types
I'm trying to figure out what this error message means: error: In RelAddr: Top-level forms in instruction pattern should have void types The definitions it's complaining about: //===----------------------------------------------------------------------===// // RELADDR //===----------------------------------------------------------------------===// def SDT_RELADDR :
2008 Jul 02
2
[LLVMdev] Implementing llvm.atomic.cmp.swap.i32 on PowerPC
Evan Cheng wrote: > You need to insert new basic blocks and update CFG to accomplish this. > There is a hackish way to do this right now. Add a pseudo instruction > to represent this operation and mark it usesCustomDAGSchedInserter. > This means the intrinsic is mapped to a single (pseudo) node. But it > is then expanded into instructions that can span multiple basic >
2017 Sep 15
2
Changes to 'ADJCALLSTACK*' and 'callseq_*' between LLVM v4.0 and v5.0
Hi LLVM-Devs, I have managed to complete updating our sources from LLVM v4.0 to v5.0, but I am getting selection errors for 'callseq_end'. I am aware that the 'ADJCALLSTACKUP' and 'ADJCALLSTACKDOWN' patterns have changed, and have added an additional argument to the TD descriptions for these. There are interactions with 'ISD::CALL' and 'ISD::RET_FLAG',