similar to: [LLVMdev] Bang Operator

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

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

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

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

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";

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 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

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

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

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, Indeed, the complex add is more expensive on all Cortex cores I know of. However there is an important point here that the code sequence we generate requires two registers live instead of one. In high regpressure loops, were probably losing performance. James On Wed, 11 Nov 2015 at 21:09, Tim Northover via llvm-dev < llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: > On 11 November 2015 at

I am building LLVM on OS X 10.7.5 with cmake. Under this configuration some ASan and UBSan tests are failing: $ make check-ubsan … ******************** Testing Time: 2.36s ******************** Failing Tests (11): UndefinedBehaviorSanitizer :: Float/cast-overflow.cpp UndefinedBehaviorSanitizer :: Integer/add-overflow.cpp UndefinedBehaviorSanitizer :: Integer/div-zero.cpp

Thanks a lot Tim. I am getting an error which says: "LLVM ERROR: unable to write nop sequence of 0 bytes" Is there any way that I can print out the Obj code (I mean bitstream representation of the assembly code which is going to be placed in the ELF file), before making any ELF file? Cheers, ES On Tue, Oct 13, 2015 at 3:02 PM, Tim Northover <t.p.northover at gmail.com> wrote:

Some more information … On Jan 4, 2013, at 6:56 PM, Meador Inge wrote: > I am building LLVM on OS X 10.7.5 with cmake. Under this configuration some ASan and UBSan tests > are failing: > > $ make check-ubsan > > … > > ******************** > Testing Time: 2.36s > ******************** > Failing Tests (11): > UndefinedBehaviorSanitizer ::

Hi Lang, LoadedObjectInfo::getSectionLoadAddress takes StringRef as an arg. That breaks if the object file has multiple sections with the same name. I made a change to add an overload that takes a SectionRef&. Can you please take a look? https://github.com/erozenfeld/llvm/commit/65f635e426bdc8e80a29ed370a78f0c0a282f265 Thanks, Eugene -------------- next part -------------- An HTML

I also encounter this issue and solved it locally by implementing this 2 functions. - The linux version of StartSymbolizerSubprocess uses only POSIX function and can be reused as is on OS X (maybe we should move it in a new sanitizer_symbolizer_posix.cc file) - I have a simple implementation of GetListOfModules (see the attached file) but it required 10.6 at least. That said, implementing this

Hi, I was looking at some AArch64 benchmarks and noticed some simple cases where addresses are being folded into the address mode computations and was curious as to why. In particular, consider the following simple example: void f2(unsigned long *x, unsigned long c) { x[c] *= 2; } This generates: lsl x8, x1, #3 ldr x9, [x0, x8] lsl x9, x9, #1 str x9, [x0, x8] Given the two

Hi All, I recently ran into an issue that was posted several years back on LLVMdev [1]. A brief recap of the problem is that when cross-compiling LLVM itself the configure/make scripts get confused when creating the needed build host tools. For example, building and configuring like: CC_FOR_BUILD='i686-pc-linux-gnu-gcc' CXX_FOR_BUILD='i686-pc-linux-gnu-g++'

On 08/02/2012 11:11 AM, Chris Lattner wrote: >> A new self-contained `LibCallSimplifier` class will be created. An instance >> of the class will be instantiated when running the `InstCombiner` pass. It's >> folding functionality will be invoked from `InstCombiner::tryOptimizeCall` and >> the implementation will be table-driven like `SimplifyLibCalls`. All of the