similar to: [Sparc] Load address with SETHI

Hi, I'm implementing __builtin_setjmp and __builtin_longjmp for Sparc 32 bit processors (64 bit later, time allowing). I'm basing the code on the PowerPC version, which itself is based on the X86 version. This code is very nearly working, and I've had it working for -O0 optimisation (with a slightly different version to that below), so I know it's close. However, the PowerPC

In http://reviews.llvm.org/D8713, I added the 64bit integer store ("std") and load ("ldd") instructions for 32bit sparc. But now I need codegen to know how to emit them, and am not sure the best way to go about teaching the backend that 64bit integers can be used natively, but only for loads and stores. (I originally wrote an earlier draft of question in the review but it

Hi James, Jim If you *really* want this to work in selection DAG then there is a solution, but its not pretty. First make i64 not be legal. Then, assuming the regclass you gave has some subregs, you can give load/store a custom legalisation where you change the i64 to MVT::Untyped. So something like this for ISD::STORE: SDValue ValueToBeStored = St.getOperand(…) auto SeqOps[] = {

Hi, While working on https://reviews.llvm.org/D79785, we wanted to define foldMemoryOperandImpl hook for Thumb1, that folds load, indirect call to direct call tLDRpci, tBLX -> tBL. This triggered an assertion error with expensive checks turned on in MachineVerifier because the newly created tBL insn by Thumb1InstrInfo::foldMemoryOperandImpl had memory operands of LoadMI attached by

Hi, During instruction selection, I have the following code for certain LOAD instructions: const LoadSDNode *LD = cast<LoadSDNode>(N); SDNode* LDW = CurDAG->getMachineNode(AVR::LDWRdPtr, SDLoc(N), VT, PtrVT, MVT::Other, LD->getBasePtr(), LD->getChain()); // Honestly, I have no idea what this does, but other memory // accessing instructions

> On Apr 2, 2015, at 2:07 PM, Tom Stellard <tom at stellard.net> wrote: > > On Thu, Apr 02, 2015 at 01:35:55PM -0700, Pete Cooper wrote: >> Hi James, Jim >> >> If you *really* want this to work in selection DAG then there is a solution, but its not pretty. >> >> First make i64 not be legal. Then, assuming the regclass you gave has some subregs, you

Hi Quentin, I get following error from MachineVerifier: # End machine code for function f. *** Bad machine code: Missing mayLoad flag *** which comes from: // Check the MachineMemOperands for basic consistency. for (MachineMemOperand *Op : MI->memoperands()) { if (Op->isLoad() && !MI->mayLoad()) report("Missing mayLoad flag", MI); if (Op->isStore()

Hello, LLVM devs. I'm compiling the following simple IR: define dso_local i32 @main(i32 %argc, i8** %argv) { entry: %retval = alloca i32, align 4 %argc.addr = alloca i32, align 4 %argv.addr = alloca i8**, align 8 store i32 0, i32* %retval, align 4 store i32 %argc, i32* %argc.addr, align 4 store i8** %argv, i8*** %argv.addr, align 8 ret i32 0 } using `llc -march=sparc

I'm looking over the RR list scheduler and am wondering about how the Sethi-Ullman numbers are used. The comments and the code indicate that the node with the lowest S-I number is scheduled first. Traditionally S-I scheduling schedules the node with the highest S-I number first. What am I missing? -Dave

David Greene <dag at cray.com> writes: > What am I missing? Perhaps that this is bottom-up scheduling, so picking the lower-numbered node is the same as picking the higher-numbered node in a top-down scheduler? Just looking for confirmation. Thanks! -Dave

Hi, Does anyone have any direction for me on testing a back-end pre-emit pass independently of other passes? The pass I'm looking at is a MachineFunctionPass, so the code is already using target-specific instructions. What I'm really looking to do is to see that the pass is correctly converting certain target-specific instructions sequences into other sequences, but I'm unsure how I

I've been looking to see if there's a way to get the instruction below (SMAC) emitted from a higher-level construct, but I'm starting to think this is unrealistic. To do so, I'd have to tie-in two other instructions: Firstly, clearing the ASR18 and Y register somewhere near the start of the method, then copying out the value of these registers somewhere near the end of the method,

I'm trying to define a multiply-accumulate instruction for the LEON processor, a Subtarget of the Sparc target. The documentation for the processor is as follows: === To accelerate DSP algorithms, two multiply&accumulate instructions are implemented: UMAC and SMAC. The UMAC performs an unsigned 16-bit multiply, producing a 32-bit result, and adds the result to a 40-bit accumulator made

Hi, I have a task to complete and I'm getting stuck. I can't find anything comparable in the documentation. The shortest explanation I can give is as follows: I need to use double-precision floating point values for floating-point multiplies. I'll not go into why: That would take the discussion away from the essential problem. E.g. Replace: fmuls %f20,%f21,%f8 with the

Hi, I've discovered a problem on Sparc processors (specifically, LEON, but I suspect but can't verify that it also happens on all Sparc processors). The problem is, or appears to be with using double values in Sparc (32 bit). Specifically, double values are not being loaded into registers correctly within a function using va_args. Only half the value is loaded (i.e. 32, rather than 64

The following code is causing me problems in the Sparc back-end and I believe it's related to a lot of issues that I have, so I'd love to work out what I need to do to resolve this. I'm currently not making much headway into it. I'm going to try to simplify this to the core problem I can see and hope I haven't missed anything relevant. The original code I have is as follows:

Dear everyone, It's time for the release notes nagging email. We have release notes for LLVM, Clang, clang-tools-extra, lld, and Polly. (If there are more, please let me know.) Most of these are pretty empty files; see e.g. the LLVM one at [1]. The internet does read these notes when we release, so please help make them informative! If you made any interesting changes during the past six

Hi, in section B.29. (Write State Register Instructions) of 'The SPARC Architecture Manual Version 8' it is said that the "The write state register instructions are delayed-write instructions." The Y-register is a state-register. Furthermore in the B.29-secion there is a programming note saying: MULScc, RDY, SDIV, SDIVcc, UDIV, and UDIVcc implicitly read the Y register.

On 7/29/2017 1:28 AM, Dr. ERDI Gergo via llvm-dev wrote: > Hi, > > During instruction selection, I have the following code for certain > LOAD instructions: > > const LoadSDNode *LD = cast<LoadSDNode>(N); > SDNode* LDW = CurDAG->getMachineNode(AVR::LDWRdPtr, SDLoc(N), > VT, PtrVT, MVT::Other, > LD->getBasePtr(), LD->getChain()); >

on gk208+ we can simply mov 32bits, so we should have a single mov there Signed-off-by: Karol Herbst <nouveau at karolherbst.de> --- drm/nouveau/nvkm/subdev/pmu/fuc/gf100.fuc3.h | 1598 +++++++++++------------ drm/nouveau/nvkm/subdev/pmu/fuc/gf119.fuc4.h | 1494 +++++++++++----------- drm/nouveau/nvkm/subdev/pmu/fuc/gk208.fuc5.h | 1424 ++++++++++-----------