similar to: [LLVMdev] Avoiding MCRegAliasIterator with register units

Jakob, I've implemented a patch that reworks the MCRegAliasIterator to dynamically compute the register aliases. The size reduction in the RegDiffLists are rather dramatic. Here are a few size differences for MCTargetDesc.o files (before and after) in bytes: R600 - 36160B - 11184B - 69% reduction ARM - 28480B - 8368B - 71% reduction Mips - 816B - 576B - 29% reduction One side effect of

On 24 May 2013 17:39, Chad Rosier <mcrosier at apple.com> wrote: > One side effect of dynamically computing the aliases is that the iterator > does not guarantee that the entries are ordered or that duplicates have > been removed. > Hi Chad, Sounds like you're growing the list (thus the lookup time), rather than shrinking, as I take it was Jacob's original intention?

Hi, I’m facing a crash issue (--target=arm-linux-gnueabi -march=armv8-a+crc -mfloat-abi=hard) and debugging the problem, I found that an intended branch was not taken due to bad code generation after the Post RA Scheduler pass. A CMPri instruction after an INLINEASM block (which inturn contains a cmp, bne instruction) is being moved before the INLINEASM block incorrectly resulting in two

On Apr 19, 2013, at 7:18 AM, <dag at cray.com> wrote: > Jakob Stoklund Olesen <stoklund at 2pi.dk> writes: > >>> A MachineOperand has both a getReg() and a getSubReg() interface. >>> For a physical register operand, is getReg() guaranteed to be the >>> "most super" register with getSubReg() providing the specific >>> subregister

Jakob Stoklund Olesen <stoklund at 2pi.dk> writes: >> A MachineOperand has both a getReg() and a getSubReg() interface. >> For a physical register operand, is getReg() guaranteed to be the >> "most super" register with getSubReg() providing the specific >> subregister information for the operand? If so then for my current >> purposes it seems I

Hi Chris, It did compile when I gave that option. But it gives me an error when I try to run the executable on an Intel machine. ----- 1513158 is not prime. Exception handler needed, but not enabled. Recompile program with -enable-correct-eh-support. lli[0x8429bb4] lli[0x8429dc0] /lib/libc.so.6[0x40128c18] /lib/libc.so.6(abort+0x161)[0x40129cb5] [0x403da922] ../../../i386: line 4: 27606

Hi there, In my register allocator, I was trying to get the parent of a register in ARM. That is: D0 <-> S0, S1. Given S0, how am I able to get D0? Thanks, Xiaochu -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/attachments/20160719/3cc73e78/attachment.html>

Hi John, I have attached my Makefile.config. I noticed that I did'nt have SRC_ROOT and OBJ_ROOT variables defined as such in my environment. But I noticed that this is defined in the Makefile.config by default to the same values. All the same, I tried defining both these variables in my .cshrc, but I still get the same error. The main directory for me is /home/llvm, and I have

On Sep 10, 2012, at 2:26 AM, Lang Hames <lhames at gmail.com> wrote: > I've got a good test case that I'm working on at the moment. I noticed something odd though: Is '0' a valid register unit? I'm seeing a LiveInterval with li->reg == 0 show up, which previously wasn't valid. We have a few checks around the place to disregard the '0' physreg - could

Does anyone know the "standard" commandline to compile and run spec95 benchmarks ? I found some scripts in llvm test suite (External/SPEC/CINT95), but I am not sure if they are the *default ref* configurations. <Some of them seem to use smaller problem sizes.> SPEC95 was retired many years ago, so few people around me know how to compile and run them. I am building from

Hi, I am getting this when running make-test :- $ /usr/src/llvm-test-2.5/configure checking for spec95 benchmark sources... no, not found in /home/vadve/shared/ben chmarks/spec95/benchspec checking for spec2000 benchmark sources... no, not found in /home/vadve/shared/b enchmarks/speccpu2000/benchspec checking for spec2006 benchmark sources... no, not found in /home/vadve/shared/b

Some of the run commandlines don't seem to be the *default ref* configuration. For instance, in 099.go, what's in the script is: LEVEL = ../../../.. BM=099.go ifeq ($(RUN_TYPE),test) STDIN_FILENAME = /dev/null STDOUT_FILENAME = null.out RUN_OPTIONS = 40 19 else STDIN_FILENAME = 2stone9.in STDOUT_FILENAME = 2stone9.out RUN_OPTIONS = 50 9 endif include ../../Makefile.spec95

You may have noticed Andy and me committing TableGen patches for "register units". I thought I'd better explain what they are. Some targets have instructions that operate on sequences of registers. I'll use ARM examples because it is the most notorious. ARM has, for example: vld1.64 {d1, d2}, [r0] The instruction loads two d-registers, but they must be consecutive. ARM also

Hi Jakob, I've got a good test case that I'm working on at the moment. I noticed something odd though: Is '0' a valid register unit? I'm seeing a LiveInterval with li->reg == 0 show up, which previously wasn't valid. We have a few checks around the place to disregard the '0' physreg - could these trigger on interaction with a '0' interval? That could

On Mon, Feb 23, 2009 at 6:09 PM, Dale Johannesen <dalej at apple.com> wrote: > These benchmarks are not distributed with llvm (which doesn't have the > legal right to distribute Spec, for example). If you have them from > another source, you need to configure --with-externals=<path> Okay, thanks. Thre should be better warning/error reporting though. Aaron > >

On Thu, 21 Jul 2005, Long Fei wrote: > which suggests the compiling command: > gcc -DSPEC_CPU95 -O2 -o spec_go g2.c g22.c g23.c g25.c g26.c g27a.c g27b.c > g28.c g29.c g2eye.c g2jlib2.c g2jos.c g2list.c g2reas.c g2s2.c g2s3.c g2shp.c > and the running commandline: > ./spec_go 50 9 2stone9.in > < are these correct ? > I believe that we only include test/train inputs for

Vinay S. Belgaumkar wrote: > Ok, I am trying to configure llvm to compile benchmarks as suggested by > John, and after running configure, I get the following error while > running make in the /test/Programs/External/SPEC Hmmm. It sounds like the Makefiles are not creating the gccld command line correctly. Some questions: 1) Can you send us your Makefile.config? 2) Can you tell us

On Thu, 21 Jul 2005, Long Fei wrote: > Does anyone know the "standard" commandline to compile and run spec95 > benchmarks ? > > I found some scripts in llvm test suite (External/SPEC/CINT95), but I am not > sure if they are the *default ref* configurations. <Some of them seem to use > smaller problem sizes.> SPEC95 was retired many years ago, so few people

Ok, I am trying to configure llvm to compile benchmarks as suggested by John, and after running configure, I get the following error while running make in the /test/Programs/External/SPEC ---- make[1]: Entering directory `/home/llvm/llvm/test/Programs/External/SPEC/CINT95' make[2]: Entering directory `/home/llvm/llvm/test/Programs/External/SPEC/CINT95/099.go'

These benchmarks are not distributed with llvm (which doesn't have the legal right to distribute Spec, for example). If you have them from another source, you need to configure --with-externals=<path> On Feb 23, 2009, at 10:02 AMPST, Aaron Gray wrote: > Hi, > > I am getting this when running make-test :- > > $ /usr/src/llvm-test-2.5/configure > checking for