similar to: [LLVMdev] Question about calling convention implementation in LLVM target

Hi, Thanks a lot for your answer. It seems lld is still the best solution, even if it does not work "right out of the box" for us today. We already have a solution for the "objcopy" part (added the required output format to llvm-objdump). The ScriptLayout class seems to be empty for now (on the master branch at least), but we do not need linker scripts today. All that is

Hi, We are currently developing an LLVM-based compilation toolchain for a micro-controller, but would need some advice about whether we should use lld as linker. So far we managed to write a basic target handler to read ELF files generated by llc and link them (and relocations seem to be applied correctly). But we have target-specific requirements: - the program will be loaded into memory as-is,

Hi llvm-dev, >> The CopyFromReg->CopyToReg->CopyFromReg sequence doesn’t have the chains set correctly: the second CopyFromReg’s input chain isn’t connected to the CopyToReg’s output chain. (This appears to be the same problem in both graphs.) The DAG mentioned was generated by the SelectionDAGBuilder and as much as possible, we only modify the files within our target so I tried

I'm confused as to the logic used in the register scavenger when it cannot find a free register. I would think that it would want to free up the emergency spill slot immediately after it's use, because otherwise there is a chance of needing to use the emergency slot again and not be able to. Instead it tries to restore it only right before register it is freeing up. Maybe I'm

Hello all, For my custom processor backend I am trying add some instruction using BuildMI() inside eliminateFrameIndex(). I tried RegScavenger like this: unsigned RegUnused0 = RS->FindUnusedReg(&LASER::GNPRegsRegClass); if (!RegUnused0) RegUnused0 = RS->scavengeRegister(&LASER::GNPRegsRegClass, II, SPAdj); assert(RegUnused0 && "Register scavenger failed");

Hi, After removing support for the i64 type in the *CallingConv.td, sret-demotion is performed and we now have a store<(store 8, align 1)> DAG node being generated. Please refer to the attached dag_funcret.pdf DAG visualization. My understanding is that, the second operand(CopyFromReg->Register %1, Register %0 back-up) in the store node is the memory location allocated for the i64 type

Hi Reed, the register scavenger (RS) also keeps track of live registers. This way it "knows" that the register that was spilled/restored far apart is available. Let say you had the following code. You need to find a register to keep vreg1 and vreg2 in. R1 = .... // <- RS current liveness state; we have called RS->forward(It) where It points to here vreg1 = add SP, 1000 ... =

I've been looking through the code for pologue/epilogoue generation and noticed this oddity: void PEI::replaceFrameIndices(MachineFunction &Fn) { [...] for (MachineBasicBlock::iterator I = BB->begin(); I != BB->end(); ) { [...] if (I->getOpcode() == FrameSetupOpcode || I->getOpcode() == FrameDestroyOpcode) { [...] } else {

I'm working on a target based on the MIPS target, and when I copy f64 values into 32 bit registers for calling functions, I need the operation to work on a of 32 bit registers (because the language I'm translating to isn't actually mips). I've been looking at how to do this, but I haven't been able to figure it out. Since the Mips target code is still really close to mine,

On Jan 27, 2009, at 3:54 PM, Villmow, Micah wrote: > Ok, I've had time to track this down a little bit more and I seem to > have found another case where it fails. This is occurring during > Schedulur->EmitSchedule() in SelectionDAGISel.cpp:695. The problem > seems > to be that somehow the CopyToReg part of the switch statement in > ScheduleDAG::EmitNode has a

Ok, I've had time to track this down a little bit more and I seem to have found another case where it fails. This is occurring during Schedulur->EmitSchedule() in SelectionDAGISel.cpp:695. The problem seems to be that somehow the CopyToReg part of the switch statement in ScheduleDAG::EmitNode has a FrameIndex as its second operand. This is especially problematic because the code is either

Hi, I''m experiencing some troubles with an application in a VM (domain-1) which needs to connect too itself via the loopback interface. It seems that the connection process hang during the TCP handshake. I have a running web server in this VM which run perfectly. Logged in Domain-1, i''ve tried to reach the webserver with telnet but the same problem happens. Even pinging the

How many entries ? TDB Database is limited 250 users. -- Rodolphe ---------- Message transf?r? ---------- From: "Hoogstraten, Ton" <Ton.Hoogstraten@ingram.nl> To: <samba@lists.samba.org> Date: Sun, 3 Jun 2007 16:08:06 +0200 Subject: [Samba] Samba/Winbind slow with Active Directory Hi all, I'm looking for answers regarding a problem I'm having with Samba. Since a

Ok I have to get a vote of all the people that are going to come to Cluecon so we order the beer keg's for the developers board room. Anyone have any preference? (if you haven't registered for ClueCon now is the time to register!) Choices... choices... choices... I want Red Bull on tap! /b --- Anakin: ?You?re either with me, or you?re my enemy.? Obi-Wan: ?Only a Sith could be an

Ryan, I don't think I fully understand the problem you described, but please see the comments below. Hope this helps you solve the problem. On Sat, Oct 6, 2012 at 3:18 PM, ryan baird <ryanrbaird at gmail.com> wrote: > I'm working on a target based on the MIPS target, and when I copy f64 > values into 32 bit registers for calling functions, I need the operation to > work

John, I've moved with patches to HEAD and unfortunately the comments about disabling tailcalls do not go away with this update. Please see ARMTargetLowering::LowerCall in lib/Target/ARM/ARMISelLowering.cpp line 1208 and later. It looks like man can use -arm-tail-calls, but one never knows how good it is since the comment tells it clearly: // Temporarily disable tail calls so things

Hi people, As I said before: I did the IDCT to run on the FPGA. My friends from university did the Reconstruction routines running on the FPGA. I'm helping with the LoopFilter, and it is almost there. (all VHDL) I did a small profiling of the libTheora running on a Altera Stratix II device: The processor used was the NIOS II with 8Kb of data and instruction cache, branch prediction and

Hello Cameron, thanks a lot for your fast answer, which just makes me curious if making ARM tailcalls on par with x86 in the future is on some of the development plans already? If not, then what do you think is the complexity of such work? Thanks! Karel On 06/17/11 10:41 PM, Cameron Zwarich wrote: > They work pretty well now, at least on Thumb2 / Darwin. It is still fairly conservative

Hello, just by curiosity, what is the current development status of theora? (TODOs, etc.) Only the documentation still left out? :-) Rodolphe --- >8 ---- List archives: http://www.xiph.org/archives/ Ogg project homepage: http://www.xiph.org/ogg/ To unsubscribe from this list, send a message to 'theora-dev-request@xiph.org' containing only the word 'unsubscribe' in the body.

Hi! I'm making a strange observation in my backend, that ends in illegal code: Version 1: - I lower FrameIndex to TargetFrameIndex (nothing special) - I generate a special address-register ADD instruction in eliminateFrameIndex() to write FramePointer + offset into a new address-register - I use explicit load and store and address-registers in my target instruction patterns: eg (store