similar to: [LLVMdev] various mips16 and micro mips issues

On Fri, Jan 20, 2012 at 1:59 PM, reed kotler <rkotler at mips.com> wrote: > We are starting to look at the mips16 and micro mips ports. > > There are various design issues that people may have some good input on. > Especially in how to structure the TD files and other optimizer issues. > > Mips16 is sort of like thumb and Micro Mips like thumb2 as far as I > understand.

On Friday, January 20, 2012 03:59:14 PM reed kotler wrote: > We are starting to look at the mips16 and micro mips ports. [snip] I'm looking forward to seeing the mips16 and micro mips support. As an aside, the Mips code generator as it exists looks pretty solid so far in my testing. As I've been building the NetBSD library (and other stuff) using my ELLCC copy of clang/LLVM only the

I'm working on the mips16. Mips16 is a mode of the Mips32 (or Mips64) processor. For the most part, it is a compressed form of the MIPS32 instruction set, though not all instructions are supported. Most of the same opcodes and formats are present though sometimes with some restriction. (The micro mips architecture is a true 16 bit compressed form of MIps32 though also with some

On Jan 24, 2012, at 1:46 AM, Reed Kotler wrote: > Mips16 is a mode of the Mips32 (or Mips64) processor. For the most part, > it is a compressed form of the MIPS32 instruction set, though not all > instructions are supported. Most of the same opcodes and formats are > present though sometimes with some restriction. (The micro mips > architecture is a true 16 bit compressed form

Is it possible to assign the value of subtarget features using more complex expressions with code as opposed to using the mechanism that tablegen affords. For example, if Mips16 or Micro Mips is not present, then I want the subfeature "standard encoding". If I can't do this, then it requires me to write a more complex expression for the "standard encoding" expresions.

My understanding was that micro mips was similar to Thumb2, in that the smaller encodings have constraints on which registers can be read/written, because of the narrowing of the register fields in the encoding. If that's the case, then it definitely makes sense to model the micro mips instruction set as distinct from the mips32 instruction set, in basically the same way that Thumb2 is done.

The problem is that everything about the mips32 and micro mips 16 instruction is the same, aside from the encoding in to binary. Seems like maybe we need to extend the notion of an instruction so that it can have alternate encodings depending on subtarget. On 09/05/2012 08:28 PM, Jim Grosbach wrote: > The instructions are defined by their encodings, not the assembly syntax. You want

On Mon, Jan 7, 2013 at 4:16 PM, reed kotler <rkotler at mips.com> wrote: > On 01/04/2013 07:45 PM, Eli Friedman wrote: >> >> On Fri, Jan 4, 2013 at 6:28 PM, reed kotler <rkotler at mips.com> wrote: >>> >>> On 01/04/2013 06:08 PM, Eli Friedman wrote: >>>> >>>> On Fri, Jan 4, 2013 at 4:08 PM, reed kotler <rkotler at mips.com>

Micro mips is really 100% .s compatible with mips32. There are no register field size constraints and such. It's a strict superset of mips32. For the gcc port, the assembler is basically the only thing we changed. The gcc port was just adding the ".micromips" directive to the .s file and maybe some tiny driver work. That is the quandary. The entire .td file would have to be

On 01/04/2013 07:45 PM, Eli Friedman wrote: > On Fri, Jan 4, 2013 at 6:28 PM, reed kotler <rkotler at mips.com> wrote: >> On 01/04/2013 06:08 PM, Eli Friedman wrote: >>> On Fri, Jan 4, 2013 at 4:08 PM, reed kotler <rkotler at mips.com> wrote: >>>> I'm working on mips16 hard float which at a first approximation is just >>>> soft

Actually, SP is already not in the mips 16 register class but there is some C++ code that is common to mips32, mips64 and mips16 that is wanting to use SP. It's kind of awkward but does work except in this case of load/store haflword and byte to stack objects. Maybe I'm shooting myself in the foot there. I don't know that code too well so maybe I need to look into it. There are

Reed, It's not clear to me that you need to do anything special here. If you define your MIPS16 register class as not containing SP, then any MIPS16 instructions that get selected and want to read from SP should get a COPY inserted from SP to a MIPS16 vreg. The coalescer should, ideally, get rid of extraneous copies for you. --Owen On Sep 20, 2012, at 10:48 PM, Reed Kotler <rkotler at

On Sep 20, 2012, at 11:44 PM, Reed Kotler <rkotler at mips.com> wrote: > Actually, SP is already not in the mips 16 register class but there is some C++ code that is common to mips32, mips64 and mips16 that is wanting to use SP. It's kind of awkward but does work except in this case of load/store haflword and byte to stack objects. > ARM has a similar problem. The InstrInfo

I'm working on mips16 hard float which at a first approximation is just soft float but calls different library routines. Those different library routines are just an implementation (in mips32 mode) of soft float using mips32 hardware instructions. This part is already done. (mips16 mode has no floating point instructions). The next level of this that I am working on now is the ability to

On Fri, Jan 4, 2013 at 4:08 PM, reed kotler <rkotler at mips.com> wrote: > I'm working on mips16 hard float which at a first approximation is just soft > float but calls different library routines. Those different library routines > are just an implementation (in mips32 mode) of soft float using mips32 > hardware instructions. This part is already done. (mips16 mode has no

Trying to think of a clever way to do something.... On Mips 16, the SP (stack pointer) is not a directly accessible register in most instructions. There is a way to move to and from mips 16 registers (subset of mips32) and mips32 registers. For the load/store word instructions, there are forms which implicitly take SP. However, for store/load byte and store/load halfword, there is no such

On Fri, Jan 4, 2013 at 6:28 PM, reed kotler <rkotler at mips.com> wrote: > On 01/04/2013 06:08 PM, Eli Friedman wrote: >> >> On Fri, Jan 4, 2013 at 4:08 PM, reed kotler <rkotler at mips.com> wrote: >>> >>> I'm working on mips16 hard float which at a first approximation is just >>> soft >>> float but calls different library

On 01/04/2013 06:08 PM, Eli Friedman wrote: > On Fri, Jan 4, 2013 at 4:08 PM, reed kotler <rkotler at mips.com> wrote: >> I'm working on mips16 hard float which at a first approximation is just soft >> float but calls different library routines. Those different library routines >> are just an implementation (in mips32 mode) of soft float using mips32 >>

The micro mips processor assembly language is basically 100% the same as mips32/mips64. There are some assembler directives you add but for a base port, but that is all you need to do. However, the binary instruction encoding is entirely different. There are a combination of 16 and 32 bit instruction encodings. The question is, what's the best way to handle this? Extending tablegen ?

Ok. That's a somewhat different problem, then. Devil will be in the details of what you want to do. A few options. First is to always have a standard frame pointer register available and reference off of that. Caveat: dynamic stack realignment and vararrays muck with that more than a bit. Second is what gcc is doing and reserve a register just for this in addition to the frame register.