================
@@ -2896,6 +2898,68 @@ mlir::LogicalResult
CIRToLLVMGetBitfieldOpLowering::matchAndRewrite(
return mlir::success();
}
+mlir::LogicalResult CIRToLLVMInlineAsmOpLowering::matchAndRewrite(
+ cir::InlineAsmOp op, OpAdaptor adaptor,
+ mlir::ConversionPatternRewriter &rewriter) const {
+ mlir::Type llResTy;
+ if (op.getNumResults())
+ llResTy = getTypeConverter()->convertType(op.getType(0));
+
+ cir::AsmFlavor dialect = op.getAsmFlavor();
+ mlir::LLVM::AsmDialect llDialect = dialect == cir::AsmFlavor::x86_att
+ ? mlir::LLVM::AsmDialect::AD_ATT
+ : mlir::LLVM::AsmDialect::AD_Intel;
+
+ SmallVector<mlir::Attribute> opAttrs;
+ StringRef llvmAttrName = mlir::LLVM::InlineAsmOp::getElementTypeAttrName();
+
+ // this is for the lowering to LLVM from LLVM dialect. Otherwise, if we
+ // don't have the result (i.e. void type as a result of operation), the
+ // element type attribute will be attached to the whole instruction, but not
+ // to the operand
+ if (!op.getNumResults())
+ opAttrs.push_back(mlir::Attribute());
+
+ SmallVector<mlir::Value> llvmOperands;
+ SmallVector<mlir::Value> cirOperands;
+ for (auto [llvmOp, cirOp] :
+ llvm::zip(adaptor.getAsmOperands(), op.getAsmOperands())) {
+ llvmOperands.append(llvmOp.begin(), llvmOp.end());
+ cirOperands.append(cirOp.begin(), cirOp.end());
+ }
+
+ // so far we infer the llvm dialect element type attr from
+ // CIR operand type.
+ for (auto [i, cirOpAttr] : llvm::enumerate(op.getOperandAttrs())) {
----------------
mmha wrote:
```suggestion
for (auto const&[cirOpAttr, cirOp] : zip(op.getOperandAttrs(), cirOperands)) {
```
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/153387
_______________________________________________
llvm-branch-commits mailing list
llvm-branch-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-branch-commits
