similar to: [LLVMdev] Legal action type for BUILD_VECTOR

> -----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: >

I tried to add an 'OptForSize' requirement to a pattern in X86InstrSSE.td, but it appears to be ignored. However, the condition was detected when specified as a predicate. So this doesn't work: def : Pat<(v2f64 (X86VBroadcast (loadf64 addr:$src))), (VMOVDDUPrm addr: $src)>, *Requires<[OptForSize**]>*; But this does: * let Predicates = [OptForSize]

I've been working on adding support for the PPC 440/450 "embedded" cores to the PowerPC backend. These are used on IBM's Blue Gene L and P supercomputers, but are also used in other environments (like on the Xilinx Virtex-5). Here is my first patch. I'm new to LLVM, and so I apologize if this is the wrong way to do this [the online docs seem to imply that a patch should be

Hey devs, >From ISDOpcodes.h... /// BUILD_VECTOR(ELT0, ELT1, ELT2, ELT3,...) - Return a fixed-width vector /// with the specified, possibly variable, elements. The number of elements /// is required to be a power of two. The types of the operands must all be /// the same and must match the vector element type, except that integer types /// are allowed to be larger than the element type, in

On Oct 5, 2011, at 8:22 AM, Hal Finkel wrote: > I've been working on adding support for the PPC 440/450 "embedded" cores > to the PowerPC backend. These are used on IBM's Blue Gene L and P > supercomputers, but are also used in other environments (like on the > Xilinx Virtex-5). Here is my first patch. I'm new to LLVM, and so I > apologize if this is the wrong

Thanks for the clarification. The `except` seemed dangling to me, but it's early here. Just curious... how do we end up with a mixed type BUILD_VECTOR? That's counterintuitive. On Tue, Jul 7, 2020 at 10:58 AM Krzysztof Parzyszek via llvm-dev <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: > > Mixed integer types are ok, but the values will get truncated to the element type of the output

I have two patterns in tablegen that do look like the exact same thing: Pat 1) def MOV_v4i16 : ILFormat<IL_OP_MOV, (outs GPRV4I16:$dst), (ins i16imm:$val), asm, [(set GPRV4I16:$dst, (build_vector (i16 imm:$val)))]>; Pat 2) def v4i16imm : Operand<v4i16>; def MOV_v4i16 : ILFormat<IL_OP_MOV, (outs GPRV4I16:$dst), (ins v4i16imm:$val), asm, [(set

Mixed types aren't allowed. They are checked for in VerifySDNode in SelectionDAG.cpp and will fail an asserts build. ~Craig On Tue, Jul 7, 2020 at 8:25 AM Krzysztof Parzyszek via llvm-dev < llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: > The problem can happen when you want to build a vector of i8, but i8 > itself is not legal on your target. All operands to BUILD_VECTOR will be >

On Monday 17 November 2008 14:28, David Greene wrote: > I want to write a pattern that looks something like this: > > def : Pat<(unalignedstore (v2f64 VR128:$src), addr:$dst), > (MOVSDmr ADD64ri8(addr:$dst, imm:8), ( SHUFPDrri (VR128:$src, > (MOVSDmr addr:$dst, FR64:$src))), imm:3) > > So I want to convert an unaligned vector store to a scalar store, a

I am trying to compile this little C-program: ================= typedef double v2f64 __attribute__((ext_vector_type(2))); int sse2_cmp_sd(v2f64, v2f64, char ) asm("llvm.x86.sse2.cmp.sd"); int main() { static int i; static float x[10]; static float y[10]; v2f64 m1; v2f64 m2; int j; i = sse2_cmp_sd(m1,m2,'z'); ========================== I expected to

On Thursday 02 October 2008 11:37, David Greene wrote: > I'll try ot write a small example and send it in a bit. Ok, here's what I'm trying to do: let AddedComplexity = 40 in { def : Pat<(v2f64 (vector_shuffle (v2f64 (scalar_to_vector (loadf64 addr: $src1))), (v2f64 (scalar_to_vector (loadf64 addr: $src2))),

I have added a few PPC-specific DAG combines in the past that follow this pattern on specific operations. Now that it appears that this would be useful to do on yet another operation, I'm wondering what people think about doing this in the target-independent DAG Combiner for any legal/custom operation on the target. TL; DR; The generic pattern would look like this: (build_vector (op

On Friday 03 October 2008 12:06, Dan Gohman wrote: > On Fri, October 3, 2008 9:10 am, David Greene wrote: > > On Thursday 02 October 2008 19:32, Dan Gohman wrote: > >> Looking at your dump() output above, it looks like the pre-selection > >> loads have multiple uses, so even though you've managed to match a > >> larger pattern that incorporates them, they

On Dec 29, 2009, at 5:50 AM, fima rabin wrote: > I am trying to compile this little C-program: > ================= > typedef double v2f64 __attribute__((ext_vector_type(2))); > > int sse2_cmp_sd(v2f64, v2f64, char ) asm("llvm.x86.sse2.cmp.sd"); We used to support this, but there are problems with it. I actually just went to go implement this again, which

Hi All, First of all, I am not native English speaker. While reading BUILD_VECTOR related code, for example, PPCTargetLowering::LowerBUILD_VECTOR, I see "splat" here and there. Could someone explain what it is (does splat mean the same thing across the whole code base)? Besides, from my English dictionary, I don't know why we call such thing as "splat"... :p Regards,

I want to write a pattern that looks something like this: def : Pat<(unalignedstore (v2f64 VR128:$src), addr:$dst), (MOVSDmr ADD64ri8(addr:$dst, imm:8), ( SHUFPDrri (VR128:$src, (MOVSDmr addr:$dst, FR64:$src))), imm:3) So I want to convert an unaligned vector store to a scalar store, a shuffle and a scalar store. There are several question I have: - Is the imm:3 syntax

I have a patch I'd like to commit that adds commentary to asm files about which TableGen pattern generated a particular instruction. The output looks like this: cvtpd2ps %xmm0, %xmm0 # source.c:39 # Src: (intrinsic_wo_chain:v4f32 927:iPTR, VR128:v2f64:$src) # Dst: (Int_CVTPD2PSrr:v4f32 VR128:v2f64:$src)

Thanks so much for your feedback Simon. I am not sure that what I am proposing here is at odds with what you're referring to (here and in the PR you linked). The key difference AFAICT is that the pattern I am referring to is probably more aptly described as "reducing scalarization" than as "vectorization". The reason I say that is that the inputs are vectors and the output

Jakob Stoklund Olesen <jolesen at apple.com> writes: >> What happens if the result of the above pattern using COPY_TO_REGCLASS >> is spilled? Will we get a 64-bit store or a 128-bit store? > > This behavior isn't affected by the change. FR64 registers are spilled > with 64-bit stores, and VR128 registers are spilled with 128-bit > stores. > > When the

LLVM's type legalizer is changing the types of BUILD_VECTORs in a way that seems wrong to me, but I'm not sure if this is a bug or if some targets may be relying on it. On a 32-bit target, the default action for legalizing i8 and i16 types is to promote them. If you then have a BUILD_VECTOR to construct a legal vector type composed of i8 or i16 values, the type legalizer will