similar to: [LLVMdev] TSFlags

Many thanks for your prompt reply. I mean, imagine you have 3 bits for condition flags in your instruction (e.g. overflow, zero, carry set, ...) for conditional executions AND there is no direct access to the Status Register, is it even possible to implement such scenario? On Fri, Jul 10, 2015 at 4:54 PM, Krzysztof Parzyszek < kparzysz at codeaurora.org> wrote: > On 7/10/2015 9:32

Hi Krzystof, regarding your first solution (creating separate instruction), is it possible to somehow have cascading defm? for example, let's suppose aaa is a 3-bit condition a, and bb is a 2-bit condition b, all in one instruction, instead of having one multiclass with 2^5 conditions, is it possible to write 2^3 "a" conditions, and 2^2 "b" conditions, and the rest taken

On 7/10/2015 10:23 AM, Sky Flyer wrote: > Many thanks for your prompt reply. > > I mean, imagine you have 3 bits for condition flags in your instruction > (e.g. overflow, zero, carry set, ...) for conditional executions AND > there is no direct access to the Status Register, is it even possible to > implement such scenario? > There doesn't have to be any explicit status

On 11/6/2015 11:35 AM, Sky Flyer via llvm-dev wrote: > Guys, I stuck at this point. Could you please give me a hint how to > solve this problem without touching the LLVM backbone?! > Why LLVM doesn't let me define an instruction consisting of an operator > with no operand? Could you try it without the pattern? I.e. just this: class TestInst<string opc, string asmstr,

For example something like STARTUP ( http://wiki.osdev.org/Linker_Scripts#STARTUP) is not accepted by the LLVM LLD. :-/ On Wed, Apr 20, 2016 at 9:08 PM, Sky Flyer <skylake007 at gmail.com> wrote: > Yeah I found it, that's nice. Thanks a milion. > Could you please tell me how can I specify my bootstrap (startup code) in > the linking process? > > > On Wed, Apr 20, 2016

search for VAStart. Cheers, Rafael On 20 April 2016 at 14:18, Sky Flyer <skylake007 at gmail.com> wrote: > Hi Rafael, > > Thanks a lot. > For example the start entry for me is 0x11000 by default which I don't know > where it come from! I thought there should be a default thing that sets this > entry address. > > On Wed, Apr 20, 2016 at 8:05 PM, Rafael Espíndola

There is no default linker script. Cheers, Rafael On 20 April 2016 at 11:23, Sky Flyer via llvm-dev <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: > for instance, where is the internal default linker script located? How can I > change the default values, for example the star address... > > On Wed, Apr 20, 2016 at 5:17 PM, Sky Flyer <skylake007 at gmail.com> wrote: >> >>

Hi, That's what the DecoderMethod is for. Similarly ParserMatchClass for the asm parser and PrintMethod for the asm printer: def CondCodeOperand : AsmOperandClass { let Name = "CondCode"; } def pred : PredicateOperand<OtherVT, (ops i32imm, i32imm), (ops (i32 14), (i32 zero_reg))> { let PrintMethod = "printPredicateOperand";

Dear all, in my TestRegisterInfo.td file, I defined a register like this: class TestReg<bits<6> enc, string name> : Register<name> { let HWEncoding{5-0} = enc; let Namespace = "TEST"; } def D0 : TestReg<0x01, "d0">, DwarfRegNum<[1]>; but when I compile, the result I have in TestGenAsmMatcher.inc is this: case 'd': // 7

Hi ES, From what I understand instruction parsing is divided into two parts: - Parsing an operand list (XXXAsmParser::ParseInstruction) - Turning the operand list into an actual instruction (XXXAsmParser::MatchAndEmitInstruction) The second part does the validation (e.g. how many operands, what kind, etc) while the first part only does the parsing. That's why I think in the first part

Hi all, I am trying to implement an instruction with no operand for example "clr" in TableGen. ----------------------------------------- e.g. *InstrInfo.td:* class TestInst<string opc, string asmstr, dag oops, dag iops, list<dag> pattern> : Instruction { ... } def int_no_operand : Intrinsic<[]>; class ALU<string opc> : TestInst<opc,

Hello James, that was also what I've planned to do but just wasn't sure. Thanks for that. On Mon, Dec 14, 2015 at 11:52 AM, James Molloy <james at jamesmolloy.co.uk> wrote: > Hi, > > You can't nest operands like that - it must be a flattened list. So: > > def *Xpred* : PredicateOperand<OtherVT, (ops *i32imm, i32imm*, i32imm), > (ops (i32 14), (i32

Hello LLVM, I'd like to check TSFlags in my AsmBackend code. However AsmBackend objects don't have a reference to MCInstrInfo, which is the only way I've seen to reach TSFlags. A quickie grep shows that none of the existing targets check TSFlags in their AsmBackends. Is there any reason I shouldn't check TSFlags in AsmBackend? If not, what's the best way to go about it?

Thank you :) If you mean this field, it looks everything is ok: field bits<16> Inst = { 0, 1, 1, 0, 1, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, Dr{2}, Dr{1}, Dr{0}, At{0}, 0, 0 }; Is possible that the problem might be on the TestAsmParser.cpp side? On Thu, Sep 17, 2015 at 4:18 PM, Krzysztof Parzyszek via llvm-dev < llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: > On 9/17/2015 9:04 AM, Krzysztof Parzyszek via llvm-dev

Thanks Meador, The confusion point for me is that, does ! as an operator (bang operator) add any meaning to the strconcat? On Thu, Jul 23, 2015 at 5:25 PM, Meador Inge <meadori at gmail.com> wrote: > On Thu, Jul 23, 2015 at 9:53 AM, Sky Flyer <skylake007 at googlemail.com> > wrote: > > > Hello all, > > > > I don't find anything helping me understand

On 9/17/2015 7:04 AM, Sky Flyer via llvm-dev wrote: > It seems like d0 is always 14! > I check it with ARMGenAsmMatcher.inc it was the same! > How is it possible? because it should give the same register value that > matches the underlying platform not any autogenerated value!? The returned number is the register id as defined in <YourTarget>GenRegisterInfo.inc. These numbers

Hi all, How does the new lld implementation work with the "Linker Script" for the object file adjustment? I couldn't find enough resources on the web. Any help is highly appreciated. Cheers, ES -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/attachments/20160420/dc5445e8/attachment-0001.html>

Hi all, in most of the architectures, assembly operands are comma-separated. I would like to parse an assembly code that is space-separated and I am having a bit of problem. In *ParseInstruction* function, I don't know what is the easiest way to figure out how many operands a mnemonic expected to have. In comma-separated assembly code, it just consuming commas (while

Hello all, I don't find anything helping me understand the llvm bang operator. In the llvm TableGen language reference, it only says: 'TableGen also has “bang operators” which have a wide variety of meanings: *'* I would be very thankful if someone can explain it to me. e.g. what does "!strconcat" or "!if" mean? Cheers ES -------------- next part --------------

On Thu, Jul 23, 2015 at 9:53 AM, Sky Flyer <skylake007 at googlemail.com> wrote: > Hello all, > > I don't find anything helping me understand the llvm bang operator. In the > llvm TableGen language reference, it only says: > > 'TableGen also has “bang operators” which have a wide variety of meanings:' > > I would be very thankful if someone can explain it