similar to: [LLVMdev] LLVM Value relationship with metadata

On 5 Nov 2012, at 07:07, Arsen wrote: > Would anybody explain why there is not direct connection between llvm::Value > and metadata nodes. If llvm::Value hold pointer to its MDNode would it cause > any malfunctioning? The rationale was that most values did not have any metadata, and therefore there would be a space penalty paid for every node. Increasingly, it seems that nodes have

Thanks for your reply David. Would you please clarify what do you mean by saying: David Chisnall-5 wrote > Increasingly, it seems that nodes have several metadata nodes and so they > are all paying the time penalty for the lookup. Arsen -- View this message in context: http://llvm.1065342.n5.nabble.com/LLVM-Value-relationship-with-metadata-tp50737p50793.html Sent from the LLVM - Dev

Hi all, I want to generate an assembly instruction for my target using target description representation of the instruction. The problem is that I want to add direct register to be chose as an output register for my target. Does it possible to do with an instruction definition in TARGETInstrInfo.td file? May be someone could help with an example? Currently I have seen that we can pass the name

On Mon, Jun 30, 2014 at 02:40:43AM -0700, Quentin Colombet wrote: > Hi Arsen, > > > > On Jun 19, 2014, at 10:43 PM, Arsen Hakobyan <artinetstudio at gmail.com> wrote: > > > > Hi all, > > > > I want to generate an assembly instruction for my target using target > > description representation of the instruction. The problem is that I want to

On 6 Nov 2012, at 04:54, Arsen wrote: > Thanks for your reply David. Would you please clarify what do you mean by > saying: > > David Chisnall-5 wrote >> Increasingly, it seems that nodes have several metadata nodes and so they >> are all paying the time penalty for the lookup. I mean that metadata has gone from being something that occasionally appeared, and then

Hi all, I have the following test case: #define FLT_EPSILON 1.19209290E-7 int err = -1; int main() { float a = 8.1; if (((a - 8.1) >= FLT_EPSILON) || ((a - 8.1) <= -FLT_EPSILON)) { //I am using FLT_EPSILON to check whether (a != 2.0). err = 1; } else { err = 0; } return 0; } with -O3 optimization level clang generates already incorrect LLVM IR: ; Function Attrs:

Hi Arsen, On Oct 9, 2013, at 4:53 AM, Arsen Hakobyan <artinetstudio at gmail.com> wrote: > Hi all, > > I have the following test case: > #define FLT_EPSILON 1.19209290E-7 > > int err = -1; > int main() > { > float a = 8.1; > if (((a - 8.1) >= FLT_EPSILON) || ((a - 8.1) <= -FLT_EPSILON)) { //I am > using FLT_EPSILON to check whether (a != 2.0).

Dear Tom, What is the advantage to use the “pseudo instruction” approach VS “custom lowering/DAGtoDAGSelection” VS “ Library function”? Best Kevin On Aug 14, 2014, at 9:27 AM, Tom Stellard <tom at stellard.net> wrote: > On Thu, Aug 14, 2014 at 12:05:33AM -0700, Arsen Hakobyan wrote: >> Hi all, >> >> I would like to be sure that Tablegen still does not support

Hi all, I would like to be sure that Tablegen still does not support completely separate multiple instruction generation, and the only way is to write costume code (may be in TargetISelDAGToDAG class) to get the needed result. Dear Tom, do you found other solution (using Tablegen tool) for this? Thanks, Arsen -- View this message in context:

+ Adrian + David Hi Arsen, This sounds like a bug to me. Have you tried reproducing it on trunk? For instance, I see that the relation between DICompileUnit and DISubprogram was changed in the meantime (https://reviews.llvm.org/D19034 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D19034>). If this no longer occurs on master you could bisect the compiler to find the commit(s) that fix this and consider

Thanks Paul, Hi Adrian and David I would really appreciate any comments, thoughts assumptions. If additional information is needed please let me know. Regards, Arsen On Sat, Jan 13, 2018 at 2:54 AM, Robinson, Paul <paul.robinson at sony.com> wrote: > Hi Arsen, we are beyond what I understand about how metadata operates. > Maybe Adrian or David knows. > > --paulr > >

Hello All, I am interested in Control Dependence Graph building using the CFG and Dominance Frontier provided by corresponding passes. Just wandering whether LLVM provides some kind of pass or builder which will generate the Control Dependence Graph? Thanks, Arsen -- View this message in context: http://llvm.1065342.n5.nabble.com/Control-Dependence-Graph-builder-tp56687.html Sent from the

Hi Arsen, we are beyond what I understand about how metadata operates. Maybe Adrian or David knows. --paulr From: Arsen Hakobyan [mailto:hakobyan.ars at gmail.com] Sent: Friday, January 12, 2018 12:16 PM To: Robinson, Paul Cc: llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org; David Blaikie Subject: Re: [llvm-dev] StripDeadDebugInfo for static inline functions. Just one update: the function causing the segmentation

Dear all. I have a problem with the following situation: I want to handle an intrinsic function in a specific way. The prototype of my function is: "/int my_intrinsic_name()/" So I want to generate a move instruction which should use two register type operands: "/mov R1, R2/" For this purpose I assume that the instruction definition in the TargetInstrInfo.td file

On 4/12/13 3:19 PM, Arsen wrote: > Thank you John. > Actually the opt tool (from LLVM 3.2 version) can generate the needed graphs > (with pass "-domfrontier"). > But I just want to surely know is there some pass or builder which can be > integrated somehow so it will be possible directly to generate CDG? Yes and no. There's isn't a control dependence pass in LLVM

Just one update: the function causing the segmentation fault is the following: 359 void DwarfDebug::constructAbstractSubprogramScopeDIE(LexicalScope *Scope) { 360 assert(Scope && Scope->getScopeNode()); 361 assert(Scope->isAbstractScope()); 362 assert(!Scope->getInlinedAt()); 363 364 const MDNode *SP = Scope->getScopeNode(); 365 366

The sign information for binary operators is available in the llvm IR by the 'nsw' (no signed wrap) flag. Seems there is no use of this flag in the code generation phase. The sign information is no more available in the selection DAG. So how can I generate different instructions for binary operators with signed/unsigned operands in the assembler (e.g. mul/mulu)? -- View this message in

Hi all, My question is related to the register usage in instruction definition at TARGETInstrInfo.td file. I have defined new Target with it Registers and instructions. Now I need to generate an instruction like: mov MYREG1_NAME, MYREG2_NAME for the built-in function taking one constant integer argument, such as "__builtin_my_function_name(88)" I wondering whether it is possible

Hi everyone, How would you pass a string container from TargetISelLowering phase to the TargetInstPrinter phase? May be I have missed something essential, but currently seems they don't have shared class or something like that, and currently I am thinkin to initialize container in TargetTargetMachine, then pass it to the TargetInstPrinter using TargetMCAsmInfo class or something like this. I

Hi Paul, Thanks for your response. Let me actually post more details visualizing my case. Assuming that can help. so the IR before the opt tool is running is: ; Function Attrs: nounwind define i16 @main() #0 !dbg !13 { entry: %retval = alloca i16, align 1 ... } ; Function Attrs: inlinehint nounwind define internal void @delay(i16 %d) #4 !dbg !69 { entry: %d.addr = alloca i16,