similar to: Handling of the x18 register in Wine on AArch64

Hi, When using Wine to run Windows ARM64 executables on Linux, there's one major ABI incompatibility between the two; Windows treats the x18 register as the reserved platform register, while it is free to be clobbered anywhere in code on Linux. The Wine code sets up this register before passing control over to the Windows executable code, but whenever the Windows code calls a function

Thank you for your reply Eli, I too was working with Carey on this feature, so please let me reply. On 12/21/18 8:05 PM, Friedman, Eli via llvm-dev wrote: > As a side-note, you might want to check that prologue/epilogue emission won't emit a PUSH/POP that refers to a register reserved this way; we sometimes add an "extra" register to align the stack. Yes, you are right.

Hi all, This is a RFC on support for Global Register Variables in the Arm backend. Whilst there has been some prior discussion about whether or not LLVM should (or even needs to) support global register variables, today there seems to be a good measure of support for this in both Clang+LLVM (although it is currently limited to SP). When most of this support landed there was some concern

Hi, How can I reserve an ARM register for only a part of the code? Example: lets say I have 3 functions, A(), B() and C(). I want to prohibit compiler from using a register (lets say X9 in ARM 64) in function C() only. I think that by AArch64RegisterInfo::getReservedRegs function, a register can be reserved for the whole program. But, I need to reserve for only part of the code. Can I

On Oct 30, 2008, at 11:02 PM, Chris Lattner wrote: > On Oct 30, 2008, at 5:23 PM, Jack Howarth wrote: >> ps We do have one oddity left in llvm-gfortran from current llvm >> svn. I find everytime I compile something with llvm-gfortran that >> I get a series of warning messages... >> >> f951: warning: command line option "-Wformat" is valid for C/C++/

On 10/2/2012 9:36 AM, 陳韋任 (Wei-Ren Chen) wrote: > On Tue, Oct 02, 2012 at 09:23:27AM -0500, Matthew Curtis wrote: >> I'm adding support for -ffixed-<reg> for Hexagon and was wondering if I should >> do it in such a way that other targets get the support as well by default or if >> a given target back-end should have to explicitly opt-in for support. > What

Hi, Thanks a lot. Is it possible to implement that functionality as a pragma? Ex. .. [code] ... #pragma A .. .. #pragma B .. .. Lets say I want to reserve registers X9 and X10 only within pragma A and B. Is it possible to achieve this in llvm? Thanks Nisal On Mon, Jun 12, 2017 at 9:54 PM, Tim Northover <t.p.northover at gmail.com> wrote: > Hi Nisal, > > (Adding llvm-dev back

Hi I am trying to register shadow a global variable using -ffixed option in llvm-gcc. I am able to accomplish this using gcc however llvm-gcc seems to ignore this option and generate code using the register. command line: >gcc -Wall -m64 -O3 -pthread -ftls-model=initial-exec -ffixed-r12 test.c -o test >objdump -d ./test | grep r12 >llvm-gcc -Wall -m64 -O3 -pthread

On Tue, Oct 02, 2012 at 09:23:27AM -0500, Matthew Curtis wrote: > I'm adding support for -ffixed-<reg> for Hexagon and was wondering if I should > do it in such a way that other targets get the support as well by default or if > a given target back-end should have to explicitly opt-in for support. What "-ffixed-<reg>" does? Regards, chenwj -- Wei-Ren Chen

I'm adding support for -ffixed-<reg> <http://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/gcc-3.4.3/gcc/Code-Gen-Options.html#index-ffixed-1435> for Hexagon and was wondering if I should do it in such a way that other targets get the support as well by default or if a given target back-end should have to explicitly opt-in for support. Any opinions? Matthew Curtis. -- Qualcomm Innovation Center,

Hi Chris, > From the design perspective, I think it would make sense to represent this in > LLVM IR with named metadata (http://llvm.org/docs/LangRef.html# > namedmetadatastructure) like "!llvm.fixedregs". This could then be picked up > by the code generator, installed as preallocated registers (Jakob would be the > one to ask how best to do this). -ffixed-<reg>

On Oct 2, 2012, at 7:23 AM, Matthew Curtis <mcurtis at codeaurora.org> wrote: > I'm adding support for -ffixed-<reg> for Hexagon and was wondering if I should do it in such a way that other targets get the support as well by default or if a given target back-end should have to explicitly opt-in for support. It would be great to have this as a target-indepentent (well, obviously

> From the GCC manual (http://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/gcc-4.7.2/gcc/ > Code-Gen-Options.html#index-ffixed-2267) > > -ffixed-reg > > Treat the register named reg as a fixed register; generated code should > never refer to it (except perhaps as a stack pointer, frame pointer or in > some other fixed role). > > reg must be the name of a register. The

On Oct 3, 2012, at 12:13 AM, 陳韋任 (Wei-Ren Chen) <chenwj at iis.sinica.edu.tw> wrote: > Hi Chris, > >> From the design perspective, I think it would make sense to represent this in >> LLVM IR with named metadata (http://llvm.org/docs/LangRef.html# >> namedmetadatastructure) like "!llvm.fixedregs". This could then be picked up >> by the code

Hi All I am having 2 very long character strings (550chars) and I want to put them as expressions together with c(). The problem is that I also get these double-quotes, as seen below in 'fct'. How can I remove these double-quotes? I tried as.name() but it did not work (because of size?). These are creating trouble with subsequent programs, which I tested with strings that for some

Getting this warning compiling on an alpha, is it a problem? 2.4.15-pre4 gcc -D__KERNEL__ -I/usr/users/donjr/linux-2.4.15-pre4/include -Wall -Wstrict-prototypes -Wno-trigraphs -O2 -fomit-frame-pointer -fno-strict-aliasing -fno-common -pipe -mno-fp-regs -ffixed-8 -mcpu=ev5 -Wa,-mev6 -DEXPORT_SYMTAB -c journal.c journal.c: In function `journal_init_inode': journal.c:758: warning: long long

Hi All, I'm attempting to use eps-regression or nu-regression SVM to compute probabilities but the predict function applied to an svm model object returns values outside [0, 1]: Variable Data looks like: Present X02 X03 X05 X06 X07 X13 X14 X15 X18 1 0 1634 48 2245.469 -1122.0750 3367.544 11105.013 2017.306 40 23227 2 0 1402 40 2611.519 -811.2500 3422.769 10499.425 1800.475 40 13822 3 0 1379

When building with LTO, there is an increased risk of the compiler converting an address dependency headed by a READ_ONCE() invocation into a control dependency and consequently allowing for harmful reordering by the CPU. Ensure that such transformations are harmless by overriding the generic READ_ONCE() definition with one that provides acquire semantics when building with LTO. Signed-off-by:

When building with LTO, there is an increased risk of the compiler converting an address dependency headed by a READ_ONCE() invocation into a control dependency and consequently allowing for harmful reordering by the CPU. Ensure that such transformations are harmless by overriding the generic READ_ONCE() definition with one that provides acquire semantics when building with LTO. Signed-off-by:

Hello everyone, I made a quick patch to clang/llvm to introduce an "apple_abi" function attribute (https://github.com/aguinet/llvm-project/commit/c4905ded3afb3182435df30e527955031cb0d098), to be able to compile functions for the Apple ARM64 ABI when targeting other ARM64 OSes (e.g. Linux). This can be seen as the Apple version of the already existing "ms_abi" attribute. In