similar to: Register Number

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

On 9/17/2015 8:30 AM, Sky Flyer wrote: > Hi Krzysztof, > > Thanks for your reply. I wanted to assign the hardware encoding to the > Instruction bits like the link below: > > https://groups.google.com/d/msg/llvm-dev/BfUmfIWYRM8/6JGXQf1gCQAJ > > but, at the end, what is assigned to the Inst is, I suppose, the > register ID not the encoding! > > to be more clear, I do

Hi All, I have a question about TableGen RegisterClass definition. I need to map different size of MVTs into a register class as below. def TestReg : RegisterClass<"Test", [v8i32, v4i32], ...> When I look at TableGen and CodeGen, it looks the types are used as following: 1. MCRegisterClass's RegSize and Alignment 2. SpillSize in TableGen 3. Type constraint for instruction

Hi I'm trying to utilize the break command for breaking the loop when the p-value is less than 10 per cent using the urca package. But it does not break the loop, anyone that can help me? library(urca) set.seed(1) a1 <- runif(100) lag.max <- function(object, n = 12){ matris <- matrix(NA, nrow = n) for(i in 1:n) { matris[i] <- ur.df(object, lags = i,

Dear R Users, Am using lm() with contrasts as below. If I skip the contrasts() statement, I get the coefficient names to be > names(results$coef) [1] "(Intercept)" "VarAcat" "VarArat" "VarB" which are much more meaningful than ones based on integers. Can anyone tell me how to get R to keep the coefficient names based on the factor levels

Hi All, I'm new to R and am trying to run a unit root test on the vector "y" (a time series of inflation (i.e. changes in the Consumer Price Index quarter on quarter)). I've run the Augmented-Dickey-Fuller Test below (R's URCA package). It gives me an error that it cannot find the function ur.df unless I comment out the third last line of code (see below). I try to call

Hi, Jiong, Thanks for the patch! It is a great start to support 32bit register in BPF. In the past, I have studied a little bit to see whether 32bit register support may reduce the number of unnecessary shifts on x86_64 and improve the performance. Looking through a few bpf programs and it looks like the opportunity is not great, but still nice to have if we have this capability. As you

I was wondering if anyone could help with choosing optimal lag length for ZA test. There have been two lag order selection methods commonly used in the literature: 1) The ZA paper recommends to run the test with maximum number of lags. Then the lag order is reduced sequentially until the longest lag is statistically significant; 2) One could also use AIC or SBC or other criteria to choose lag

I’ve had another look, and some of the failing tests don’t use temporary files, so I don’t think this is a case of tests having side-effects. Instead, I’ve noticed that in the build log (http://lab.llvm.org:8011/builders/llvm-clang-x86_64-expensive-checks-win/builds/6552/steps/build-unified-tree/logs/stdio), llvm-tblgen.exe is built (my patch modified it), but the table-generation steps of the

Hello, This is the second version of this patch series. I only implement the VPF context switch support for arm32 and add dummy function to avoid compilation on arm64. I have switched the order of the patch because the old second one can be applied alone and the patch are cleaner :). For all the changes see each patch. Cheers, Julien Grall (2): xen/arm: don''t enable VFP on XEN

I need some real help on this, really stuck how are the coefficients for ur.ers(y, type = c("DF-GLS", "P-test"), model = c("constant", "trend"), lag.max = 0) The max lag is set at zero, so the regression should simply be Diff(zt) = a*z(t-1) where a is the value i'm trying to find and z(t)'s are the detrended values. but through performing

Hi all, I am trying to compile with a minimal TestAsmParser class, but I get the following error. ---------------- [43/780] Linking CXX executable bin/llvm-mc FAILED: : && /usr/bin/c++ -fPIC -fvisibility-inlines-hidden -Wall -W -Wno-unused-parameter -Wwrite-strings -Wcast-qual -Wno-missing-field-initializers -pedantic -Wno-long-long -Wno-maybe-uninitialized -Wno-comment -std=c++11

Dear R users, I am quite new to R, so most of the problems I've encountered working with it are technical, absurd or simple things. Sorry. Despite this, I am struggling with cajolst function for a day and still nothing. The problem is that I can't get an estimate for the break point (which is in the slot "bpoint") by using cajolst function. Finally, I've tried Johansen and

Is there any reason why we can't generate HWEncoding based decoders for registers for mc disassemblers? This is a concept patch to explore wether it'd work, and for my target, it does the right thing. I have one case where I have to shift a field over 2 bits, but I handle that in the glue. If I had a HWEncoding encoding on a per register class basis, I could have made it work without

Hi All, Is it possible to initialize(set up) register attributes when we define an instruction? like if a register is defined like this: " class SC_Register<bits<8> register_num, REG_FLAG SC_X, REG_FLAG SC_Y, REG_FLAG SC_Z, REG_FLAG SC_W, string asmstr> : Register<asmstr> { let HWEncoding{7-0} =

On Jul 31, 2014, at 7:23 PM, Tom Stellard <tom at stellard.net> wrote: > On Thu, Jul 31, 2014 at 06:41:06PM -0400, kewuzhang wrote: >> Hi All, >> >> Is it possible to initialize(set up) register attributes when we define an instruction? >> >> like >> >> if a register is defined like this: >> >> " class

On Jan 9, 2012, at 10:00 AM, Jakob Stoklund Olesen wrote: > > On Jan 8, 2012, at 11:18 PM, Demikhovsky, Elena wrote: > >> I'll explain what we see in the code. >> 1. The caller saves XMM registers across the call if needed (according to DEFS definition). >> YMMs are not in the set, so caller does not take care. > > This is not how the register allocator

This is the wrong code: declare <16 x float> @foo(<16 x float>) define <16 x float> @test(<16 x float> %x, <16 x float> %y) nounwind { entry: %x1 = fadd <16 x float> %x, %y %call = call <16 x float> @foo(<16 x float> %x1) nounwind %y1 = fsub <16 x float> %call, %y ret <16 x float> %y1 } ./llc -mattr=+avx

So I thought I'd try to use the documentation on llvm backends to try to create a DLX backend. I think I've got most of the stuff for the .td files done but I've got some problems. * Do I need to represent the PC in my XXXRegisterInfo.td file; the branch instruction effects it but you can directly access it ... I'm thinking not. * In my Instruction subclasses (in

Mark, did you get anywhere with this? We have a similar issue, where a family of otherwise-identical instructions operates on different register classes depending on a non-static property -- functional unit selection in our case. I started to head down the path of using multidefs but quickly abandoned that. I had envisioned a MachineOperand that would hold the functional unit assignment, and