similar to: [LLVMdev] LLVM backends instruction selection

I am attempting to create an instruction which takes a single 64-bit immediate. This doesn't seem like a thing that would exist already (because who needs an instruction which just takes an immediate?) How might I implement this easily? Perhaps I could use a format which encodes a register, which is then unused? Thanks for the help. Gus -------------- next part -------------- An HTML

On Wed, Jan 16, 2013 at 12:04:52PM -0500, Stephen Checkoway wrote: > > On Jan 16, 2013, at 10:07 AM, Brad Smith <brad at comstyle.com> wrote: > > > I was wondering if someone with more familiarity with MC > > on X86 could consider looking into adding support for > > the hyphenated versions of the VIA Padlock instructions? > > > Take a look at

I was wondering if someone with more familiarity with MC on X86 could consider looking into adding support for the hyphenated versions of the VIA Padlock instructions? If anyone is up for it there are details within these two bug reports.. http://www.llvm.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=8556 http://www.llvm.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=10266 -- This message has been scanned for viruses and dangerous

On Jan 16, 2013, at 10:07 AM, Brad Smith <brad at comstyle.com> wrote: > I was wondering if someone with more familiarity with MC > on X86 could consider looking into adding support for > the hyphenated versions of the VIA Padlock instructions? Take a look at llvm/lib/Target/X86InstrSystem.td perhaps. -- Stephen Checkoway

Hi, With objdump, i have this (Intel syntax) 64 a1 00 00 00 00 mov eax,fs:0x0 However, if I pass above string to llvm-mc, I would have: $ echo "0x64 0xa1 0x00 0x00 0x00 0x00"|./Release+Asserts/bin/llvm-mc -disassemble -arch=x86 --output-asm-variant=1 .text mov eax, dword ptr [0] You can see a big difference. This is on the latest code. Any idea how to

OK, here's a new patch that adds the infrastructure and the implementation for X86, ARM and PPC of GetInstSize and GetFunctionSize. Both functions are virtual functions defined in TargetInstrInfo.h. For X86, I moved some commodity functions from X86CodeEmitter to X86InstrInfo. What do you think? Nicolas Evan Cheng wrote: > > I think both of these belong to TargetInstrInfo. And

Hi Jun, I'm not sure how to fix this yet, but this looks incorrectly defined in lib/Target/X86/X86InstrInfo.td: def MOV32o32a : Ii32 <0xA1, RawFrm, (outs), (ins offset32:$src), "mov{l}\t{$src, %eax|eax, $src}", [], IIC_MOV_MEM>, Requires<[In32BitMode]>; This instruction can be REX-prefixed for a 64-bit move, and that also

On Thu, Nov 28, 2013 at 1:03 AM, Kay Tiong Khoo <kkhoo at perfwizard.com>wrote: > Hi Jun, > > I'm not sure how to fix this yet, but this looks incorrectly defined in > lib/Target/X86/X86InstrInfo.td: > > def MOV32o32a : Ii32 <0xA1, RawFrm, (outs), (ins offset32:$src), > "mov{l}\t{$src, %eax|eax, $src}", [], IIC_MOV_MEM>, >

Hi all, I think I found a bug in LLVM 3.0: When compiling for a target without SSE2 support, there were some 128-bit PXOR instructions in the generated code. I traced it down to the following definition in X86InstrSSE.td: def FsFLD0SS : I<0xEF, MRMInitReg, (outs FR32:$dst), (ins), "", [(set FR32:$dst, fp32imm0)]>,

Hi Tim, Tim Northover-2 wrote > The code used for DIV is around X86ISelDAGToDAG.cpp:2415, but from a > glance the key points seem to be: > 1. use the second result of getCopyToReg (i.e. SDValue(setIdNode, 1)) > in the RDMSR node. > 2. Give your RDMSR node type MVT::Glue instead of MVT::Other I tried doing what you said, and the DAG looks like how I think it supposed to look like

Hi, I noticed a bunch of psuedo instructions used for creation of constants without generating loads. e.g. pxor xmm0, xmm0 Here is an example of what i am referring to snipped from X86InstrSSE.td: def FsFLD0SS : I<0xEF, MRMInitReg, (outs FR32:$dst), (ins), "", [(set FR32:$dst, fp32imm0)]>, Requires<[HasSSE1]>, TB, OpSize; My question is

On Fri, Jan 20, 2012 at 2:47 PM, Nicolas Capens <nicolas.capens at gmail.com> wrote: > Hi all, > > I think I found a bug in LLVM 3.0: When compiling for a target without > SSE2 support, there were some 128-bit PXOR instructions in the generated > code. > > I traced it down to the following definition in X86InstrSSE.td: > >   def FsFLD0SS : I<0xEF, MRMInitReg,

> -----Original Message----- > From: llvmdev-bounces at cs.uiuc.edu [mailto:llvmdev-bounces at cs.uiuc.edu] > On Behalf Of Tom Stellard > Sent: 19 September 2014 01:36 > To: Sanjay Patel > Cc: llvmdev at cs.uiuc.edu > Subject: Re: [LLVMdev] predicates vs. requirements [TableGen, > X86InstrInfo.td] > > On Thu, Sep 18, 2014 at 03:25:07PM -0600, Sanjay Patel wrote: >

>>> You shouldn't have to add new classes to the .td file, just modify >>> printOp for your asmprinters. >> >> I dont think printOp is virtual and therefore cannot be overriden ? > > Why does it need to be virtual? No 'intel' printers want % signs. The GAS intel code generator generates percents, look at the X86InstrInfo.td file it is full of

Copy Ii32 in X86InstrFormats.td rename to Ii64 and change Imm32 to Imm64. Instantiate your instruction inheriting from Ii64. Pass RawFrm to the form parameter. Initial documentation for the encoding system is attached. ~Craig On Wed, Mar 28, 2018 at 4:50 PM, Gus Smith via llvm-dev < llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: > I am attempting to create an instruction which takes a single

Hello, I'm trying to write assembler code writer, and of course, have new questions. I'd like the structure my implementation like this: if (/*binary instruction*/) { // print destination O << " = "; // print first operand O << opcode; // print second operand. } if (/* unary instruction */ ) { .... } if (/*control instruction*/) { ....

Hi Everyone！ I am a newbie at llvm. So the question may be fundamental but difficult to me. I want to add an trinsics in x86 and make the following changes.I want that max_qb can find the max of two Integers and return it. In src/include/llvm/IR/Intrinsics.td : let TargetPrefix = "x86" in { def int_x86_max_qb: GCCBuiltin<"__builtin_x86_max_qb">,

tl;dr, I'd like to add my own instruction, but I'm running into problems due to my lack of x86 encoding/decoding understanding. Hello all. Currently, I'm working on adding my own x86 instruction. I have done this once before; the basic process I used was: 1. Find an unused opcode, e.g. 0xF1 in this table: http://ref.x86asm.net/coder32.html 2. Insert an instruction into

On Tue, 12 Jul 2005, Aaron Gray wrote: >>>> You shouldn't have to add new classes to the .td file, just modify >>>> printOp for your asmprinters. >>> I dont think printOp is virtual and therefore cannot be overriden ? >> Why does it need to be virtual? No 'intel' printers want % signs. > > The GAS intel code generator generates percents,

>> The GAS intel code generator generates percents, look at the >> X86InstrInfo.td file it is full of them. > > Ah, I see what you're talking about. Please feel free to remove all of > those from the Intel format. For example, change this: > > def IN8rr : I<0xEC, RawFrm, (ops), > "in{b} {%dx, %al|%AL, %DX}">, Imp<[DX],