similar to: Please test new endian stuff

Displaying 20 results from an estimated 1000 matches similar to: "Please test new endian stuff"

2011 Oct 03
0
[LLVMdev] [RFC] Proposal to make LLVM-IR endian agnostic
On 10/03/2011 09:36 PM, Villmow, Micah wrote: > One of the projects I am working on with others is to make LLVM-IR endian agnostic. > > > > So, I am sending out this proposal for feedback to the LLVM community. I’ve attached > > pretty version of the proposal in PDF format and pasted a 80-column safe text version > > below. > > > > A second smaller
2018 Nov 25
3
BUGS n code generated for target i386 compiling __bswapdi3, and for target x86-64 compiling __bswapsi2()
bswapdi2 for i386 is correct Bits 31:0 of the source are loaded into edx. Bits 63:32 are loaded into eax. Those are each bswapped. The ABI for the return is edx contains bits [63:32] and eax contains [31:0]. This is opposite of how the register were loaded. ~Craig On Sun, Nov 25, 2018 at 10:36 AM Craig Topper <craig.topper at gmail.com> wrote: > bswapsi2 on the x86-64 isn't using
2018 Nov 25
3
BUGS n code generated for target i386 compiling __bswapdi3, and for target x86-64 compiling __bswapsi2()
Hi @ll, targetting i386, LLVM/clang generates wrong code for the following functions: unsigned long __bswapsi2 (unsigned long ul) { return (((ul) & 0xff000000ul) >> 3 * 8) | (((ul) & 0x00ff0000ul) >> 8) | (((ul) & 0x0000ff00ul) << 8) | (((ul) & 0x000000fful) << 3 * 8); } unsigned long long __bswapdi2(unsigned long
2018 Dec 16
2
LLC Version 3.8 : Unsupported library call operation for a mul instruction
Hello List, I am on the hook to instrument a piece of legacy LLVM IR code, and then we are planning to feed to the SeaHorn framework for some model checking tasks. After the instrumentation, I tried to use llc (version 3.9) to compile the IR code, and it works fine. However, when I try to use llc (version 3.8.1, the default llvm version of SeaHorn) to compile the IR code, it shows the following
2016 Dec 08
2
BSWAP matching in codegen
>> Are you sure there isn't any test coverage? As far as I can tell, the tests from https://reviews.llvm.org/rL133503 are still in the tree. I looked at those, but none of them include the full pattern that decomposes into bswap and rol. I debugged through the X86 bswap.ll test and verified none of those cases make it through MatchBSwapHWord (they get handled in MatchBSwapHWordLow
2009 Dec 22
2
[LLVMdev] LegalizeDAG Error?
The LegalizeDAG.cpp file has this code in SelectionDAGLegalize::PromoteNode: case ISD::BSWAP: { unsigned DiffBits = NVT.getSizeInBits() - OVT.getSizeInBits(); Tmp1 = DAG.getNode(ISD::ZERO_EXTEND, dl, NVT, Tmp1); Tmp1 = DAG.getNode(ISD::BSWAP, dl, NVT, Tmp1); Tmp1 = DAG.getNode(ISD::SRL, dl, NVT, Tmp1, DAG.getConstant(DiffBits, TLI.getShiftAmountTy()));
2019 Mar 27
4
monorepo: bad performance when using gitk / git log
Hi! Anyone else experiencing performance problems when using the new monorepo? My experience is that performance of gitk (and git log) sometimes is really bad when working in the monorepo. I've mainly seen it when using gitk on specific files/directories, but since gitk seems to be using "git log --no-color -z --pretty=raw --show-notes --parents --boundary HEAD -- <file>" it
2016 Dec 08
2
BSWAP matching in codegen
I’m looking into problems with the function DAGCombiner::MatchBSwapHWord and had a couple questions on how to proceed (I’m new here, and to llvm). It looks like there was never any test coverage for this code, and it doesn’t match the patterns it claims to be looking for. I found a fix for this in our fork, but the fix is even worse in that it matches a whole bunch of invalid patterns as well as
2018 Nov 25
2
BUGS n code generated for target i386 compiling __bswapdi3, and for target x86-64 compiling __bswapsi2()
I just compiled the two attached files in 32-bit mode and ran it. It printed efcdab8967452301. I verified via objdump that the my_bswap function contains the follow assembly which I believe matches the assembly you linked to on godbolt. _my_bswap: 1f70: 55 pushl %ebp 1f71: 89 e5 movl %esp, %ebp 1f73: 8b 55 08 movl 8(%ebp), %edx 1f76: 8b 45 0c movl 12(%ebp), %eax 1f79: 0f c8
2019 Mar 26
2
Implement LLVM Intrinsics in C/LLVM IR
Have you looked at these? https://llvm.org/docs/LangRef.html https://llvm.org/docs/ExtendingLLVM.html On Tue, Mar 26, 2019 at 9:06 AM div code via llvm-dev < llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: > Of course, in this sense they are not platform-dependent. I just want to > write a semantics-correct version of such intrinsics and let my static > analyzer goes smoothly. > > On
2011 Oct 03
6
[LLVMdev] [RFC] Proposal to make LLVM-IR endian agnostic
One of the projects I am working on with others is to make LLVM-IR endian agnostic. So, I am sending out this proposal for feedback to the LLVM community. I've attached pretty version of the proposal in PDF format and pasted a 80-column safe text version below. I'm looking forward to comments and feedback. Thanks, Micah Villmow Text of Proposal:
2016 Sep 28
4
Load combine pass
One of the arguments for doing this earlier is inline cost perception of the original pattern. Reading i32/i64 by bytes look much more expensive than it is and can prevent inlining of interesting function. Inhibiting other optimizations concern can be addressed by careful selection of the pattern we’d like to match. I limit the transformation to the case when all the individual have no uses other
2016 Sep 28
3
Load combine pass
Hi, I'm trying to optimize a pattern like this into a single i16 load: %1 = bitcast i16* %pData to i8* %2 = load i8, i8* %1, align 1 %3 = zext i8 %2 to i16 %4 = shl nuw i16 %3, 8 %5 = getelementptr inbounds i8, i8* %1, i16 1 %6 = load i8, i8* %5, align 1 %7 = zext i8 %6 to i16 %8 = shl nuw nsw i16 %7, 0 %9 = or i16 %8, %4 I came across load combine pass which is motivated
2018 May 16
3
Rotates, once again
On 5/16/18 1:58 PM, Sanjay Patel via llvm-dev wrote: > An informal metric might be: if the operation is supported as a > primitive op or built-in in source languages and it is supported as a > single target instruction, can we guarantee that 1-to-1 translation > through optimization? It seems perfectly reasonable for LLVM users to expect this to happen reliably. I'd like to
2009 Dec 22
0
[LLVMdev] LegalizeDAG Error?
On Dec 22, 2009, at 2:38 PMPST, Bill Wendling wrote: > The LegalizeDAG.cpp file has this code in > SelectionDAGLegalize::PromoteNode: > > case ISD::BSWAP: { > unsigned DiffBits = NVT.getSizeInBits() - OVT.getSizeInBits(); > Tmp1 = DAG.getNode(ISD::ZERO_EXTEND, dl, NVT, Tmp1); > Tmp1 = DAG.getNode(ISD::BSWAP, dl, NVT, Tmp1); > Tmp1 = DAG.getNode(ISD::SRL, dl,
2008 Jul 10
2
[PATCH] PV-GRUB: xfs support
PV-GRUB: xfs support i386 doesn''t have PAE anyway. Index: fsys_xfs.c =================================================================== RCS file: /sources/grub/grub/stage2/fsys_xfs.c,v retrieving revision 1.5 diff -u -p -r1.5 fsys_xfs.c --- fsys_xfs.c 8 May 2005 02:18:14 -0000 1.5 +++ fsys_xfs.c 10 Jul 2008 13:09:50 -0000 @@ -101,7 +101,7 @@ static inline __const__ xfs_uint16_t le16
2007 Mar 31
1
[LLVMdev] About implementing new intrinsic
On Sat, 31 Mar 2007, Ferad Zyulkyarov wrote: >> IntrinsicLowering already does this. It lets you lower intrinsics to >> arbitrary LLVM calls, including calls to external functions. > > I will try to do that in IntrinscLowering class. May you point me an > intrinsic implementation that lowers to an llvm call. bswap expands into a series of shifts and or's, for example.
2019 Mar 26
2
Implement LLVM Intrinsics in C/LLVM IR
Hello, I am basically working on a static analysis project on LLVM IR, and the problem is that I will need to simulate the execution of a few LLVM Intrinsic, such as llvm.bswap.i160, and llvm.ctlz.i256. I am wondering if there has been some already implemented sample code, regarding these intrinsics? Either C or LLVM IR. Thanks a lot! Best, -------------- next part -------------- An HTML
2018 May 17
0
Rotates, once again
A rotate intrinsic should be relatively close in cost/complexity to the existing bswap. A grep of intrinsic::bswap says we'd probably add code in: InstCombine InstructionSimplify ConstantFolding DemandedBits ValueTracking VectorUtils SelectionDAGBuilder But I don't think it's fair to view those additions as pure added cost. As an example, consider that we have to add hacks to
2016 Sep 29
2
Load combine pass
> On 29 Sep 2016, at 03:23, Sanjoy Das <sanjoy at playingwithpointers.com> wrote: > > Hi Artur, > > Artur Pilipenko via llvm-dev wrote: > > One of the arguments for doing this earlier is inline cost > > perception of the original pattern. Reading i32/i64 by bytes look much > > more expensive than it is and can prevent inlining of interesting > >