similar to: [LLVMdev] Register classes, value types

Hi all, I have been looking at the code for both the zaptel driver (wctdm.c/wcfxs.c) and the asterisk channel driver (chan_zap.c) trying to figure out how much of this that has been implemented. So far I can see that the current stable 1.0.9.1 zaptel driver don't have the SETPOLARITY ioctl that would be required to properly signal the Swedish/Dutch CLIP, but the 1.2 beta1 has this

Thanks you. I'm new to LLVM backend, so the help is much appreciated. On Sat, Oct 24, 2015 at 2:12 AM, Matt Arsenault <arsenm2 at gmail.com> wrote: > > > On Oct 23, 2015, at 3:36 AM, 李弘宇 via llvm-dev <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> > wrote: > > > The first line has the following error message: > > > > sop1-playground.s:1:15: error: invalid immediate:

On 10/10/11 19:19, Jakob Stoklund Olesen wrote: > On Oct 10, 2011, at 10:26 AM, Richard Osborne wrote: >> I'm investigating a bug associated with debug information that manifests >> itself in the XCore backend (PR11105). I'd like to understand what the >> expected behavior of eliminateFrameIndex() is when it is called on a >> dbg_value machine instruction. >

I'm working on some enhancements to rematerialization that I hope to contribute. It's mostly working but I am running into one problem. It boils down to having spilled a register used by the remat candidate. I thought this is what getReMatImplicitUse is supposed to handle but it looks inconsistent to me. The comment says this: /// getReMatImplicitUse - If the remat definition MI has

On Jan 13, 2009, at 11:20 AM, Richard Osborne <richard at xmos.com> wrote: > Roman Levenstein wrote: >> Hi again, >> >> Now, after I fixed the graph coloring regalloc bug that was triggered >> by the ARM target, I continue testing and found another bug, this >> time >> on the XCore target. First I thought that it is again specific to my >>

Looks to me like it converted the ? into the ascii hexadecimal representation _3F_. I don't think another underscore was pre-pended. This is probably thanks to lib/Target/Mangler.cpp. You'll want to let ? be treated as an acceptable character. static bool isAcceptableChar(char C, bool AllowPeriod) { if ((C < 'a' || C > 'z') && (C < 'A'

Hi Evan, thanks for your response. On Mon, 19 Jan 2009, Evan Cheng wrote: >> For example, code which looks like that: >> >> load 0x1234, reg1 >> noop >> noop >> add reg1, 1 >> load 0x1236, reg2 >> >> can be safely transformed to: >> >> load 0x1234, reg1 >> load 0x1236, reg2 >> noop >> add reg1, 1 >> >

Hi, See below I reply your message for <https://stat.ethz.ch/pipermail/r-help/2008-April/160966.html>[R] predict.glm & newdata posted on Fri Apr 4 21:02:24 CEST 2008 You say it ##works fine but it does not: if you look at the length of yhat2, you will find 100 and not 200 as expected. In fact predict(reg1, data=x2) gives the same results as predict(reg1). So I am still looking for

First I have to say I am sorry because I have not been so clear in my previous e-mails. I will try to explain clearer what it is my problem. I have the following model: lnP=Sc+Ag+Ag2+Var+R+D In this model the variable Sc is endogenous and the rest are all objective exogenous variables. I verified that Sc is endogenous through a standard Hausman test. To determine this I defined before a new

On Oct 10, 2011, at 10:26 AM, Richard Osborne wrote: > I'm investigating a bug associated with debug information that manifests > itself in the XCore backend (PR11105). I'd like to understand what the > expected behavior of eliminateFrameIndex() is when it is called on a > dbg_value machine instruction. That is up to the target. The TII::emitFrameIndexDebugValue() hook is

I'm writing a pass that looks at the operands of certain non-commutable instructions and swaps a couple of them if certain conditions exist (a register bank conflict in the instruction). If the conflict exists, I build a new instruction which has the 2nd and 3rd operands swapped (using BuildMI). Then I want to get rid of the original instruction. I had done some searching and found that

Hello, I'm writing a backend for an architecture that only has LOAD Instructions that first copy the old value of the target register in another register and after that load the provided value into the register. Example of an addition: load a, reg1; // -> copies old value of reg1 in reg2 and loads value from a into reg1 load b, reg1; // -> copies old value of reg1 in reg2 and loads

Each of the data sets contains monthly observations on price indices for 7 countries. I use the fitted values from reg1 in the reg2 model. The interior loop executes without error as long as I explicitly specify the data set, i.e. data=dat70. However the code fails to execute if I specify the model in the form of the commented line, i. e reg1 <-dynlm(form1,data=Dnames[j]) I get the following

I'm investigating a bug associated with debug information that manifests itself in the XCore backend (PR11105). I'd like to understand what the expected behavior of eliminateFrameIndex() is when it is called on a dbg_value machine instruction. Currently the XCore target replaces the frame index with the frame register and sets the next operand to the byte offset from the frame

I am relatively new to R and object oriented programming. I have relied on SAS for most of my data analysis. I teach an introductory undergraduate forecasting course using the Diebold text and I am considering using R in addition to SAS and Eviews in the course. I work primarily with univariate or multivariate time series data. I am having a great deal of difficulty understanding and working with

Hi all, In several of our tests, I have noticed that the register allocator allocates to virtual registers in a different order when compiling with the clang option -g. Before entering the register allocator, the code is identical when compiling with and without -g (with the exception of " DBG_VALUE" instructions). The only difference I can see is the value assigned to the slot index

> On Feb 2, 2017, at 8:20 AM, David Blaikie <dblaikie at gmail.com> wrote: > > The goal/intent is that debug info does not affect code generation. There are (many?) bugs. I think Apple folks (cc'd Adrian) may be looking at this a bit recently, not sure. > > The fixes aren't usually too invasive (usually involve something counting instructions where it needs to skip

> On Feb 2, 2017, at 8:20 AM, David Blaikie via llvm-dev <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: > > The goal/intent is that debug info does not affect code generation. There are (many?) bugs. I think Apple folks (cc'd Adrian) may be looking at this a bit recently, not sure. > > The fixes aren't usually too invasive (usually involve something counting instructions where

define xen paravirtualized instructions for hand written assembly code. Signed-off-by: Yaozu (Eddie) Dong <eddie.dong at intel.com> Signed-off-by: Isaku Yamahata <yamahata at valinux.co.jp> Cc: Akio Takebe <takebe_akio at jp.fujitsu.com> --- include/asm-ia64/xen/inst.h | 447 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ 1 files changed, 447 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-) create

Hi folks, I'm running into this weird issue where the register spills appear to be missing for an "if" block for some reason. For example, the original if/else blocks: --- if reg0 // storeRegToStackSlot for reg1 // do something - missing a load for reg1? else // storeRegToStackSlot for reg1 // do something // loadRegFromStackSlot for reg1 end ---- I tried looking in the LLVM