similar to: [LLVMdev] (MC) Register parsing for AsmParser (standalone assembler)

On Jan 31, 2012, at 1:26 PM, Carter, Jack wrote: > I'm trying to build a standalone assembler for Mips using AsmParser. > > Following the lead of X86, ARM and MBlaze I have run tblgen -gen-asm-matcher on Mips.td to produce tables and methods to aid the parser (MipsAsmParser.cpp) which is a stripped down ARM implementation. > > I am getting an assertion for what I believe are

Hi Jack, You're running into a fundamental problem with the current table generated asmmatcher. Specifically, wants to believe that assembly parsing is context insensitive, or at least close enough that operands can be parsed w/o knowing the context of the instruction. Its idea is to use the operand types to disambiguate which instruction should be selected. It sounds like MIPS 64vs.32 does

Hello. I started implementing a back end in LLVM (and I'm writing some hints I consider useful at https://sites.google.com/site/alexsusu/home/backend-llvm ). Unfortunately, I hit quite a few times very cryptic error messages when compiling with TableGen, which required a few good hours of debugging the TableGen program. The most cryptic error message was when compiling with

Thanks for your reply Quentin. I do understand that the registers are allocated much later in the pipeline. I am assuming that the physical registers are allocated before MipsAsmPrinter class. I am doing something like if (MI->getOpcode() == Mips::OPCODE) { unsigned n = MI->getNumOperands(); for(unsigned i=0 ; i < n ; i++) { const MachineOperand &MO =

On Jan 9, 2012, at 10:00 AM, Jakob Stoklund Olesen wrote: > > On Jan 8, 2012, at 11:18 PM, Demikhovsky, Elena wrote: > >> I'll explain what we see in the code. >> 1. The caller saves XMM registers across the call if needed (according to DEFS definition). >> YMMs are not in the set, so caller does not take care. > > This is not how the register allocator

This is the wrong code: declare <16 x float> @foo(<16 x float>) define <16 x float> @test(<16 x float> %x, <16 x float> %y) nounwind { entry: %x1 = fadd <16 x float> %x, %y %call = call <16 x float> @foo(<16 x float> %x1) nounwind %y1 = fsub <16 x float> %call, %y ret <16 x float> %y1 } ./llc -mattr=+avx

> On Feb 27, 2015, at 1:59 AM, Ambuj Agrawal <ambujbwt at gmail.com> wrote: > > Is it possible to get a register number to which the value is allocated to in MIPS in DAGToDAG class? > > More Specifically: > SDValue Reg3 = Node->getOperand(3); > if (RegisterSDNode *R = dyn_cast<RegisterSDNode>(Reg3)) >

Mark, did you get anywhere with this? We have a similar issue, where a family of otherwise-identical instructions operates on different register classes depending on a non-static property -- functional unit selection in our case. I started to head down the path of using multidefs but quickly abandoned that. I had envisioned a MachineOperand that would hold the functional unit assignment, and

Hi folks, TableGen provides sufficiently rich syntax for expressing target instruction set. Nevertheless, when I wrote the PTX backend, I observed that some redundancy in TableGen can be further eliminated through macro expansion of for-loops. The semantics of a for-loop is expanding the for-loop body, and so it is equivalent to manually unroll the loop (see example #1). I believe the for-loop

> This isn't really my area of expertise, but I think you're messing up > your RegisterClass definition. Look at how ARM defines DTriple. DTriple is untyped :) , because we do not have any valut type which defines 3xi64. However, the paired register needs to have type. Fabian, what are the definitions of ER and DR register classes? -- With best regards, Anton Korobeynikov Faculty

On 6 Dec 2012, at 07:46, 陳韋任 (Wei-Ren Chen) wrote: > The code below in lib/Target/ARM/ARMRegisterInfo.td is where you > should look into, > > // Integer registers > def R0 : ARMReg< 0, "r0">, DwarfRegNum<[0]>; > def R1 : ARMReg< 1, "r1">, DwarfRegNum<[1]>; > > ... That's the easy part. ARM (AArch32) has 16 registers

While beginning to add vector registers to a back end I came across the following problem: as soon as I define two sets of registers that have a many-to-one mapping the live interval pass appears to double- kill the mapped-onto register. I have the following excerpts from my RegisterInfo.td. def V4R0 : R4v<0 , "V4R0 ", []>, DwarfRegNum<0>; def R0 : Rg<0 ,

Hi, I want to increase the number of integer registers in the ARM machine. I don't have any idea how/where I can start. Can anybody help me? By the way, what are the following line in the ARMRegisterInfo.td specify: def qsub_0 def qsub_1 .... Thanks Best Regards, A. Yazdanbakhsh

On Oct 7, 2011, at 11:23 AM, David A. Greene wrote: > Evan Cheng <evan.cheng at apple.com> writes: > >> Your proposed new TableGen functionalities are interesting but it is >> clearly not where the code owners want it to go. > > Jakob at least seems interested in the for loop stuff. Am I reading you > correctly, Jakob? Having that feature would make a huge

Hello Jakob and everyone, I am observing an issue with MCRegUnitIterator in my back end, and trying to reverse engineer some of the table gen magic around it, but if you or someone readily knows the answer, I would highly appreciate it. Here is the problem. In my back end we have a rather simple int register file structure: // Integer registers. def R0 : Ri< 0, "r0">,

On Fri, Dec 5, 2008 at 1:52 PM, OvermindDL1 <overminddl1 at gmail.com> wrote: > / * snip */ Actually, rebuilding it makes "debug tblgen" fail with the errors at the end of this email, and as such everything that depends on it, how odd... When I get back to that computer then I will clean its directory, update from SVN (please fix the const thing soon :) ), and rebuild fresh...

Evan Cheng <evan.cheng at apple.com> writes: > David, we cannot accept the 'multidef' keyword. Please revert it. Working on it now. > We appreciate you thinking ahead about MIC, but we are against the > massive refactoring and complicated abstraction scheme. We'll never > accept those patches. How about a less massive and complicated scheme? I think we can make

Hi Sergei, Register units != sub registers. Register units are an abstraction to describe overlapping of registers effectively. You probably wanted to use MCSubRegIterator. On Thu, Aug 30, 2012 at 2:30 PM, Sergei Larin <slarin at codeaurora.org> wrote: > Hello Jakob and everyone, > > I am observing an issue with MCRegUnitIterator in my back end, and trying > to reverse

Hello everbody, This is my first email to the list, and hope to write more as i get more involved in LLVM. I'm currently writing a backend for a 8 bit microcontroller, and i have arrived to a point where i need to take a design decision in order to continue the development. Some background information: The microcontroller only has 8bit registers, however it has some special instructions that

On Fri, Dec 5, 2008 at 1:57 PM, OvermindDL1 <overminddl1 at gmail.com> wrote: > On Fri, Dec 5, 2008 at 1:52 PM, OvermindDL1 <overminddl1 at gmail.com> wrote: >> / * snip */ > > Actually, rebuilding it makes "debug tblgen" fail with the errors at > the end of this email, and as such everything that depends on it, how > odd... > When I get back to that