similar to: [LLVMdev] Unhandled instruction encoding format!

I am doing some tests running llvm on an ARM board. I'm getting an error message saying: Unhandled instruction encoding format! My steps below: Code //------------------------------------------------------------ #include <stdio.h> int main() { int a = 1; int b = 3; int c = a * b; printf("c=%d\n", c); return 0; } run on device

On Aug 2, 2012, at 3:38 AM, gaogao <gaogao_1983 at 163.com> wrote: > I am doing some tests running llvm on an ARM board. I'm getting an error > message saying: > > Unhandled instruction encoding format! > > > My steps below: > Code > //------------------------------------------------------------ > #include <stdio.h> > int main() > { > int

Hi, I was trying to do a source to source transformation in llvm from c++11 more basic c++ (to transform away auto etc.) using llvm3.1. I generate llvm bitcode using "clang++ -emit-llvm ...", but executing llc -march=cpp throws /home/broes/software/llvm/lib/Target/CppBackend/CPPBackend.cpp:493: void {anonymous}::CppWriter::printAttributes(const llvm::AttrListPtr&, const

>> > I was trying to do a source to source transformation in llvm from c++11 >> > more >> > basic c++ (to transform away auto etc.) using llvm3.1. >> > I generate llvm bitcode using "clang++ -emit-llvm ...", but executing >> > llc >> > -march=cpp throws >> > /home/broes/software/llvm/lib/Target/CppBackend/CPPBackend.cpp:493:

Dear All LLVM Users,   I'm new to LLVM environment. I want to perform basic block profiling. I'm using LLVM3.1 I tried it with a simple 'c' code to find Max.No,  mentioned below. ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- #include <stdio.h> int main() {  unsigned int i,temp;  

Hello, I m working towards backend. Here i need to define vector load and stores for 64 i32 elements. so in x86instrinfo.td i wrote; def VMOV_256B_RM : I<0x6F, MRMSrcMem, (outs VR2048:$dst), (ins i32mem:$src), "vmov_256B_rm\t{$src, $dst|$dst, $src}", [(set VR2048:$dst, (v64i32 (scalar_to_vector (loadi32 addr:$src))))],

Hi sam, On 12/06/2012 17:30, sam wrote: > Hi Ivan, > > The assertion was happening because I wasn't checking after the first > attempt failed. The first packet was failing and so it was ended, and > then the packetizer attempted to add it to the next packet without > checking for available resources. However this highlights probably the > real problem - my packetizer

Hi Ivan, The assertion was happening because I wasn't checking after the first attempt failed. The first packet was failing and so it was ended, and then the packetizer attempted to add it to the next packet without checking for available resources. However this highlights probably the real problem - my packetizer is unable to find resources for the first instruction, or any of my

Thanks for your help, Wei-Ren and Anton. However since I am doing some experiments with klee( http://klee.llvm.org/GetStarted.html) and llvm-gcc seems to have better compatibility with it. So I still hope that I can use llvm-gcc:-) Hongxu Chen On Sat, Mar 16, 2013 at 3:35 PM, 陳韋任 (Wei-Ren Chen) [via LLVM] < ml-node+s1065342n56013h94 at n5.nabble.com> wrote: > Hi Chen, > >

On 07/13/2012 04:30 PM, Duncan Sands wrote: > Hi, > >> I found the -postdomfrontier pass in *llvm*.org/docs/Passes.html, but >> 'opt' does not accept it. I could not find the relevant codes in >> PostDominance.cpp in SVN trunk, but I found some relevant codes here >> http://opensource.apple.com/source/clang/clang-137/src/lib/Analysis/PostDominators.cpp.

Hello, Is there any package to install llvm 3.1 on solaris?  Standard installation by compiling the sources does not run smoothly. I found that similar issues have been addressed before, but without replies: http://clang-developers.42468.n3.nabble.com/Using-Clang-LLVM-on-sparc-solaris-td2807126.html I tried to install llvm 3.1 on a system with Sun Microsystems Inc.   SunOS 5.10      Generic

>I'm also a little worried that your pattern has fadd, but your C >source has a subtraction. :S i wrote it wrong the true implementation is def SUBCEIL_S : FFR<0x11, 0x3, 16, (outs FGR32:$fd), (ins FGR32:$fs), "frac.s\t$fd, $fs", [(set (f32 FGR32:$fd), (fsub (f32 FGR32:$fs ),(f32 (ceilf FGR32:$fs))))] >; I use some C,C++ code to test my backend. i use clang

Hi shadowkernel, > I searched the archives and found > http://llvm.1065342.n5.nabble.com/post-dominance-frontier-fix-td10221.html > http://llvm.1065342.n5.nabble.com/Is-there-a-control-dependence-graph-builder-td35919.html#a35921 > http://llvm.1065342.n5.nabble.com/post-dominance-frontier-td6783.html > > It seems none of them are relevant. Could you give me more hints about

Thank your reply. Pankaj. Actually, I have done it very similar to yours. But I think for my demand, it is better to implement in Front End. Maybe I will re-implement it later in clang. ---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: Pankaj Gode [via LLVM] <ml-node+s1065342n59345h22 at n5.nabble.com> Date: Mon, Jul 15, 2013 at 2:35 PM Subject: Re: Regarding scope information for variable

I have seen that most of the targets do comparison and branching in two separate instructions e.g. 'cmpl' followed by 'br' in x86 or the like. LLVM IR is also in same manner. I want to implement comparison+branching in one instruction like beq r1, r2, .label #if r1==r2 then jump to .label How to merge two instruction into one. Regards Vikram Singh -- View this

Are there best practices regarding how to express saturation arithmetic in LLVM IR? In particular I want to make sure the IR translates efficiently to (SSE) vector instructions when executed in a simple loop. My first thought was to implement this naively by zero extending and branching on the minimum and maximum values. However, I'm also aware of branchfree alternatives[1]. Do the current

Hi, Have you try to directly describe such patterns in tblgen file? Like this: (brcond (i32 (cond_op RC:$rs, RC:$rt)), bb:$offset) MIPS backend does that. I also do this in my own backend, and seem to be working fine. On Mon, Jan 7, 2013 at 11:55 AM, Vikram Singh <vsp1729 at gmail.com> wrote: > I have seen that most of the targets do comparison and branching > in two separate

hi, Duncan: thanks for your patience. i have tried it. using instuction: errs()<<i->getOperand(0); but it prints the address: someting like 0x1139700; i checked the defination of getOperand() is Value* getOperand( unsigned int i); so is there someting i missed? -- View this message in context:

#include <string> #include <string.h> #include <iostream> #include <stdio.h> using namespace std; void foo(string str) { } int main() { string str="aa"; foo(str); return 0; } 1. clang++ -c -emit-llvm foo.cpp -o foo.ll 2. llc -march=cpp -o foo.ll.cpp foo.ll (at the execution of this command its giving an error as "Invalid Instruction") May I know why

Hi and thanks for answering llc works fine just does not selecting my instruction i ve uploaded .ll file how can i include this attribute "readonly" so i can see if changes the generated assembly? my code is very simple int main (){ float d, d1 ; d= 12.3; d1 = d - ceilf(d); return 0; } -- View this message in context: