Author: evancheng
Date: Wed Feb 6 02:00:32 2008
New Revision: 46813
URL: http://llvm.org/viewvc/llvm-project?rev=46813view=rev
Log:
RegAllocaLocal still *requires* LiveVariables since it runs PHIElimination,
followed by TwoAddress which requires LiveVariables. We cannot run
LiveVariables on
Here my 2 cent:
+pThe a href=http://clang.llvm.org/;clang project/a is an effort
+to build a set of new front-end technology for the LLVM optimizer and code
^
technologies
+generator. Currently, its C and Objective-C support is
Author: lattner
Date: Wed Feb 6 12:00:06 2008
New Revision: 46816
URL: http://llvm.org/viewvc/llvm-project?rev=46816view=rev
Log:
add a bunch of random notes and fix some issues noticed by Gabor.
This is not ready for review or hacking, this is a work in progress :)
Modified:
Author: lattner
Date: Wed Feb 6 12:00:48 2008
New Revision: 46817
URL: http://llvm.org/viewvc/llvm-project?rev=46817view=rev
Log:
make it clear :)
Modified:
llvm/trunk/docs/ReleaseNotes.html
Modified: llvm/trunk/docs/ReleaseNotes.html
URL:
+h1font color=redTHIS IS A WORK IN PROGRESS FOR THE LLVM 2.2
+RELEASE/font/h1
+
You forgot the blink tag :)
-eric
___
llvm-commits mailing list
llvm-commits@cs.uiuc.edu
http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/llvm-commits
On Feb 6, 2008, at 10:13 AM, Eric Christopher wrote:
+h1font color=redTHIS IS A WORK IN PROGRESS FOR THE LLVM 2.2
+RELEASE/font/h1
+
You forgot the blink tag :)
How about a javascript animation using canvas!? :)
-Chris
___
llvm-commits mailing
On Feb 5, 2008, at 2:36 PM, Dale Johannesen wrote:
On Feb 5, 2008, at 2:34 PM, Chris Lattner wrote:
On Feb 5, 2008, at 2:31 PM, Dale Johannesen wrote:
I think the calling convention stuff that Evan has been working
on is
powerful enough to model though sort of stuff, but might need minor
Ah, that's a good idea. Why not do that? :) Generally, putting the
attribute on argument #0 means that the attribute applies to the
function or the return value. Given that 'inreg' doesn't make any
sense for a function, it would be fine to overload it for this, what
do you think?
Sound
On Feb 6, 2008, at 5:33 AM, Gabor Greif wrote:
Here my 2 cent:
Thanks Gabor. I wasn't really ready for review, but I appreciate it :)
+pThe a href=http://clang.llvm.org/;clang project/a is an
effort
+to build a set of new front-end technology for the LLVM optimizer
and code
Author: lattner
Date: Wed Feb 6 12:32:06 2008
New Revision: 46818
URL: http://llvm.org/viewvc/llvm-project?rev=46818view=rev
Log:
some more notes.
Modified:
llvm/trunk/docs/ReleaseNotes.html
Modified: llvm/trunk/docs/ReleaseNotes.html
URL:
On Feb 6, 2008, at 10:25 AM, Chris Lattner wrote:
Ah, that's a good idea. Why not do that? :) Generally, putting
the
attribute on argument #0 means that the attribute applies to the
function or the return value. Given that 'inreg' doesn't make any
sense for a function, it would be
Attaching this to the Function node went smoothly enough, but I
actually need it on the Return node, which it appears isn't
supported in the current IR, but is in the the machine-level RET
node. I could transfer the info from the Function node to the RET
node at some point, or even reference
Author: void
Date: Wed Feb 6 13:05:56 2008
New Revision: 46820
URL: http://llvm.org/viewvc/llvm-project?rev=46820view=rev
Log:
I meant to retain the behavior when ENABLE_LLVM wasn't defined, but not output
to the ASM file. My patch was wrong because it issued the warning
unconditionally when
On Feb 6, 2008, at 10:48 AM, Chris Lattner wrote:
Attaching this to the Function node went smoothly enough, but I
actually need it on the Return node, which it appears isn't
supported in the current IR, but is in the the machine-level RET
node. I could transfer the info from the Function
From the current SelectionDAG you can get a pointer to the Function
object, which should have the attribute. Lowering for an ISD::RET
can thus getting it from following this chain,
I know, I just don't think that's the right way to do it.
Why not?
Everywhere else we use ParamAttrs
Author: evancheng
Date: Wed Feb 6 13:16:53 2008
New Revision: 46821
URL: http://llvm.org/viewvc/llvm-project?rev=46821view=rev
Log:
Fix a number of local register allocator issues: PR1609.
Added:
llvm/trunk/test/CodeGen/ARM/2008-02-04-LocalRegAllocBug.ll
Modified:
==
--- llvm/trunk/test/CodeGen/ARM/2008-02-04-LocalRegAllocBug.ll (added)
+++ llvm/trunk/test/CodeGen/ARM/2008-02-04-LocalRegAllocBug.ll Wed Feb 6
13:16:53 2008
@@ -0,0 +1,19 @@
+; RUN: llvm-as %s | llc
Author: void
Date: Wed Feb 6 14:03:07 2008
New Revision: 46822
URL: http://llvm.org/viewvc/llvm-project?rev=46822view=rev
Log:
Temporarily reverting:
http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/pipermail/llvm-commits/Week-of-Mon-20080128/057882.html
This is causing a miscompilation on PPC G5 and just now seeing
Author: void
Date: Wed Feb 6 15:34:01 2008
New Revision: 46824
URL: http://llvm.org/viewvc/llvm-project?rev=46824view=rev
Log:
Creating Zim branch based on llvmCore-2015
Added:
llvm/branches/Apple/Zim/
- copied from r46823, llvm/tags/Apple/llvmCore-2015/
Author: evancheng
Date: Wed Feb 6 16:07:17 2008
New Revision: 46825
URL: http://llvm.org/viewvc/llvm-project?rev=46825view=rev
Log:
It's PR1925, not PR1609.
Modified:
llvm/trunk/test/CodeGen/ARM/2008-02-04-LocalRegAllocBug.ll
Modified:
Author: void
Date: Wed Feb 6 16:18:16 2008
New Revision: 46826
URL: http://llvm.org/viewvc/llvm-project?rev=46826view=rev
Log:
[From mainline]
Temporarily reverting:
http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/pipermail/llvm-commits/Week-of-Mon-20080128/057882.html
This is causing a miscompilation on PPC G5 and
Author: void
Date: Wed Feb 6 16:33:59 2008
New Revision: 46828
URL: http://llvm.org/viewvc/llvm-project?rev=46828view=rev
Log:
[From mainline]
http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/pipermail/llvm-commits/Week-of-Mon-20080204/057964.html
RegAllocaLocal still *requires* LiveVariables since it runs
Author: void
Date: Wed Feb 6 16:35:09 2008
New Revision: 46829
URL: http://llvm.org/viewvc/llvm-project?rev=46829view=rev
Log:
Creating llvmCore-2016 tag from Zim branch
Added:
llvm/tags/Apple/llvmCore-2016/
- copied from r46828, llvm/branches/Apple/Zim/
I should clarify that, in a general sense, RegAllocLocal does not
depend on LiveVariables, but declaring it as such seems to be
necessary to obtain a working pass ordering.
--Owen
On Feb 6, 2008, at 4:33 PM, Bill Wendling wrote:
Author: void
Date: Wed Feb 6 16:33:59 2008
New Revision:
Author: djg
Date: Wed Feb 6 17:09:15 2008
New Revision: 46833
URL: http://llvm.org/viewvc/llvm-project?rev=46833view=rev
Log:
Add support to FoldingSet for hashing APInt objects.
Modified:
llvm/trunk/include/llvm/ADT/FoldingSet.h
llvm/trunk/lib/Support/FoldingSet.cpp
Modified:
Author: johannes
Date: Wed Feb 6 17:26:23 2008
New Revision: 46834
URL: http://llvm.org/viewvc/llvm-project?rev=46834view=rev
Log:
Make TARGET_PIM_ALTIVEC actually reflect -mpim-altivec.
This means vector constants using the PIM syntax will be
splatted as they're supposed to be, rather than
On Feb 6, 2008, at 3:08 PM, Owen Anderson wrote:
I should clarify that, in a general sense, RegAllocLocal does not
depend on LiveVariables, but declaring it as such seems to be
necessary to obtain a working pass ordering.
hmmm, then LiveVariables pass should be inserted in the pass
Author: djg
Date: Wed Feb 6 20:30:40 2008
New Revision: 46836
URL: http://llvm.org/viewvc/llvm-project?rev=46836view=rev
Log:
Fix a typo in a comment.
Modified:
llvm/trunk/lib/VMCore/Constants.cpp
Modified: llvm/trunk/lib/VMCore/Constants.cpp
URL:
Author: void
Date: Wed Feb 6 23:45:10 2008
New Revision: 46842
URL: http://llvm.org/viewvc/llvm-project?rev=46842view=rev
Log:
Clean up the patch about visibility. Only block out the parts LLVM
doesn't want to do instead of creating new functions and making life
miserable for everyone on the
Author: nicholas
Date: Thu Feb 7 00:36:26 2008
New Revision: 46848
URL: http://llvm.org/viewvc/llvm-project?rev=46848view=rev
Log:
Don't make up new directives. (.set_foobar)
Modified:
llvm/trunk/lib/CodeGen/AsmPrinter.cpp
Modified: llvm/trunk/lib/CodeGen/AsmPrinter.cpp
URL:
30 matches
Mail list logo
