similar to: add intrinsic function support for customized backend

Hi, Gaël, Thanks for your detailed reply. I tried the pattern matching first, however, the intrinsic function is matching with a normal function call. For example, I have the following IR, which contains intrinsic function "foo": ***************************************************************************************** *define i32 @test_func() {* *EntryBlock:* * %0 = call i32

Hi, All, Suppose I define one memory read only intrinsic function "foo" in Intrinsics.td like this def int_foo : Intrinsic<[llvm_i32_ty], [llvm_i32_ty, llvm_i32_ty], [IntrReadMem]>; Suppose I have the following IR, which means the intrinsic function "foo" is called 10 times in a loop. Since the parameters of function "foo" are invariant and the function

Hi all, I am writing a custom backend. Doing more testing i notice that for some reason something like: int test(int x) { return x - 1; } is being turned into this IR: ; Function Attrs: nounwind define i32 @test(i32 %n) #0 { entry: %n.addr = alloca i32, align 4 store i32 %n, i32* %n.addr, align 4 %0 = load i32* %n.addr, align 4 %sub = sub nsw i32 %0, 1 ret i32 %sub } But finally in

Thanks for your reply, escha, Yes, -loop-rorate makes it work. Regards, Xiangyang 2015-12-01 12:48 GMT-05:00 <escha at apple.com>: > > > On Dec 1, 2015, at 9:30 AM, Xiangyang Guo via llvm-dev < > llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: > > > > Hi, All, > > > > Suppose I define one memory read only intrinsic function "foo" in >

Hi,every one. I' in trouble again. I want add a new intrinsic mapping a new instruction. I add the int_x86_max_qb as fllowing: def int_x86_max_qb: GCCBuiltin<"__builtin_x86_max_qb">, Intrinsic<[llvm_i32_ty], [llvm_i32_ty, llvm_i32_ty], [Commutative]>; BUILTIN(__builtin_x86_max_qb, "iii", "") I define the intrinsic as Pseudo instruction,it

Hi，every one. This problem has been bothering me for several days.I really hope that you can help me. I want to add an trinsics in X86. This trinsics can compare two numbers and return the larger. There are the changes I do as fllowing. In /tools/clang/include/clang/Basic/BuiltinsX86.def : BUILTIN(__builtin_x86_max_qb, "iii", "") In include/llvm/IR/IntrinsicsX86.td : let

Hi, I'm trying to add the xadd instruction to the X86 back end. xadd r/m32, r32 exchanges r/m32 and r32, and loads the sum into r/m32. I'm interested in the case where the destination operand is a memory location. I've added the following entry to X86InstrInfo.td: def XADD32mr : I<0x87, MRMDestMem, (ops i32mem:$src1, R32:$src2), "xadd{l}

Hi Everyone！ I am a newbie at llvm. So the question may be fundamental but difficult to me. I want to add an trinsics in x86 and make the following changes.I want that max_qb can find the max of two Integers and return it. In src/include/llvm/IR/Intrinsics.td : let TargetPrefix = "x86" in { def int_x86_max_qb: GCCBuiltin<"__builtin_x86_max_qb">,

--------- Forwarded Message --------- From： Tianhao Shen <17862703959 at 163.com> Date： 11/14/2018 09:31 To： craig.topper at gmail.com <craig.topper at gmail.com> Subject： Re: [llvm-dev] How to define an instruction Hi, Craig Thank you for replying to me. I guess that you misunderstand my meaning about "can'r run". I just want to run my instruction by LLVM using the

Thank you for answering my confusion. I have another questions. If I add really instructions instead intrinsics ,can I reach my purpose? I guess ,the answer is "can't". I don't find the anything about how machine to do about instructions,especially "ALU" instructions. Thank you again, Tianhao Shen On 11/14/2018 13:42，Craig Topper<craig.topper at gmail.com>

Hi, If I define a intrinsic function with pointer-typed parameter, for example, def llvm_foo_ptr_ty : LLVMPointerType<llvm_i16_ty>; def int_foo_get : Intrinsic<[llvm_foo_ptr_ty], [llvm_foo_ptr_ty, llvm_i32_ty], [IntrReadArgMem]>; How to lower it for the backend? I'm not sure what kind of register (i16 or i32 or i32) is needed in this case? If the parameter is

On Wednesday 10 July 2013 22:18:23 Jevin Sweval wrote: > http://www.cs.fsu.edu/~baker/devices/lxr/http/source/linux/arch/x86/include/ > asm/bitops.h#L68 > > Here is one example that I found. Are the inline assembly arguments > ambiguous in size? It would help us for sure to build the kernel and others. -- JS

Hi, I'm doing a backend port and I'm having trouble with adds that have negative immediates. My architecture only has instructions for subtracting and adding 8bit immediate values (they will be zero-extended, thus unsigned). Bigger immediates have to be moved in a register first. The problem is: Expressions like "b - 1" result in "add nsw i32 %b, -1" in LLVM IR. They

On Thu, 2 Dec 2004, Brent Monroe wrote: > I'm trying to add the xadd instruction to the X86 back end. > xadd r/m32, r32 > exchanges r/m32 and r32, and loads the sum into r/m32. I'm > interested in the case where the destination operand is a > memory location. > > I've added the following entry to X86InstrInfo.td: > def XADD32mr : I<0x87, MRMDestMem, >

Thank You. I have seen the opcode is 8 bits and all the combinations are already used in llvm x86. Now what to do? On Sat, Jul 8, 2017 at 10:57 AM, Craig Topper <craig.topper at gmail.com> wrote: > Yes its an opcode conflict. You'll have to look through Intel documents > and find an unused opcode. I've only added instructions based on a real > spec so I don't know

Hi Evan, first off thanks to you and Chris for taking time. On 6 Sep 2007, at 00:57, Evan Cheng wrote: > We'd like to see tail call optimization to be similar to the target > independent lowering of ISD::CALL nodes. These are auto-generated > from ???CallingConv.td files. Some target specific details such as > function address register (ECX in your example) should be coded in

Hi, All, I'm trying to build a customized backend and I need to lower the formal arguments like this: There are several specific registers just for storing formal arguments. And also there are several general purpose registers for computation. If there is an instruction which uses parameters, I should first use a move instruction, which moves the value to general purpose register. For

Hi Arnold, Thanks for the patch. Some questions and commons: 1. Have you test it against the llvm test suite? Does it work if fp elimination optimization is turned off? 2. Please follow llvm coding convention and make sure every line fits in 80 columns. 3. enum NameDecorationStyle { None, StdCall, - FastCall + FastCall, + FastCC // the normal fastcc calling convention }; Why is

Thank you; i have changed as follows.is it fine now? def VADD_256B : I<0xFE, MRMDestReg, (outs VR2048:$dst), (ins VR2048:$src1, VR2048:$src2), "VADD_256B\t{$src, $dst|$dst, $src}", [(set VR2048:$dst, (add VR2048:$src1, VR2048:$src2))]]>; Also here i have changed class RI to I. Does it make any difference? On Sat, Jul 8, 2017 at 9:38 AM, Craig Topper

Hi all, I'm playing with intrinsics and I was wondering how to lower an intrinsic that should return, for example, an int1? More precisely, how to return the value when working with MachineInst? First, I have defined an instrinsic in "Intrinsics.td": _def int_antivm : Intrinsic<[llvm_i1_ty], [], [], "llvm.antivm">;_ Then I want to lower it in the X86 backend,