llvm-project/llvm/test/TableGen/JSON.td

147 lines
5.6 KiB
TableGen
Raw Normal View History

// RUN: llvm-tblgen -dump-json %s | '%python' %S/JSON-check.py %s
[TableGen] Add a general-purpose JSON backend. The aim of this backend is to output everything TableGen knows about the record set, similarly to the default -print-records backend. But where -print-records produces output in TableGen's input syntax (convenient for humans to read), this backend produces it as structured JSON data, which is convenient for loading into standard scripting languages such as Python, in order to extract information from the data set in an automated way. The output data contains a JSON representation of the variable definitions in output 'def' records, and a few pieces of metadata such as which of those definitions are tagged with the 'field' prefix and which defs are derived from which classes. It doesn't dump out absolutely every piece of knowledge it _could_ produce, such as type information and complicated arithmetic operator nodes in abstract superclasses; the main aim is to allow consumers of this JSON dump to essentially act as new backends, and backends don't generally need to depend on that kind of data. The new backend is implemented as an EmitJSON() function similar to all of llvm-tblgen's other EmitFoo functions, except that it lives in lib/TableGen instead of utils/TableGen on the basis that I'm expecting to add it to clang-tblgen too in a future patch. To test it, I've written a Python script that loads the JSON output and tests properties of it based on comments in the .td source - more or less like FileCheck, except that the CHECK: lines have Python expressions after them instead of textual pattern matches. Reviewers: nhaehnle Reviewed By: nhaehnle Subscribers: arichardson, labath, mgorny, llvm-commits Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D46054 llvm-svn: 336771
2018-07-11 16:40:19 +08:00
// CHECK: data['!tablegen_json_version'] == 1
// CHECK: all(data[s]['!name'] == s for s in data if not s.startswith("!"))
class Base {}
class Intermediate : Base {}
class Derived : Intermediate {}
def D : Intermediate {}
// CHECK: 'D' in data['!instanceof']['Base']
// CHECK: 'D' in data['!instanceof']['Intermediate']
// CHECK: 'D' not in data['!instanceof']['Derived']
// CHECK: 'Base' in data['D']['!superclasses']
// CHECK: 'Intermediate' in data['D']['!superclasses']
// CHECK: 'Derived' not in data['D']['!superclasses']
def ExampleDagOp;
def FieldKeywordTest {
int a;
field int b;
// CHECK: 'a' not in data['FieldKeywordTest']['!fields']
// CHECK: 'b' in data['FieldKeywordTest']['!fields']
}
class Variables {
int i;
string s;
bit b;
bits<8> bs;
code c;
list<int> li;
Base base;
dag d;
}
def VarNull : Variables {
// A variable not filled in at all has its value set to JSON
// 'null', which translates to Python None
// CHECK: data['VarNull']['i'] is None
}
def VarPrim : Variables {
// Test initializers that map to primitive JSON types
int i = 3;
// CHECK: data['VarPrim']['i'] == 3
// Integer literals should be emitted in the JSON at full 64-bit
// precision, for the benefit of JSON readers that preserve that
// much information. Python's is one such.
int enormous_pos = 9123456789123456789;
int enormous_neg = -9123456789123456789;
// CHECK: data['VarPrim']['enormous_pos'] == 9123456789123456789
// CHECK: data['VarPrim']['enormous_neg'] == -9123456789123456789
string s = "hello, world";
// CHECK: data['VarPrim']['s'] == 'hello, world'
bit b = 0;
// CHECK: data['VarPrim']['b'] == 0
// bits<> arrays are stored in logical order (array[i] is the same
// bit identified in .td files as bs{i}), which means the _visual_
// order of the list (in default rendering) is reversed.
bits<8> bs = { 0,0,0,1,0,1,1,1 };
// CHECK: data['VarPrim']['bs'] == [ 1,1,1,0,1,0,0,0 ]
code c = [{ \" }];
// CHECK: data['VarPrim']['c'] == r' \" '
list<int> li = [ 1, 2, 3, 4 ];
// CHECK: data['VarPrim']['li'] == [ 1, 2, 3, 4 ]
}
def VarObj : Variables {
// Test initializers that map to JSON objects containing a 'kind'
// discriminator
Base base = D;
// CHECK: data['VarObj']['base']['kind'] == 'def'
// CHECK: data['VarObj']['base']['def'] == 'D'
// CHECK: data['VarObj']['base']['printable'] == 'D'
dag d = (ExampleDagOp 22, "hello":$foo);
// CHECK: data['VarObj']['d']['kind'] == 'dag'
// CHECK: data['VarObj']['d']['operator']['kind'] == 'def'
// CHECK: data['VarObj']['d']['operator']['def'] == 'ExampleDagOp'
// CHECK: data['VarObj']['d']['operator']['printable'] == 'ExampleDagOp'
// CHECK: data['VarObj']['d']['args'] == [[22, None], ["hello", "foo"]]
// CHECK: data['VarObj']['d']['printable'] == '(ExampleDagOp 22, "hello":$foo)'
int undef_int;
field int ref_int = undef_int;
// CHECK: data['VarObj']['ref_int']['kind'] == 'var'
// CHECK: data['VarObj']['ref_int']['var'] == 'undef_int'
// CHECK: data['VarObj']['ref_int']['printable'] == 'undef_int'
bits<2> undef_bits;
bits<4> ref_bits;
let ref_bits{3-2} = 0b10;
let ref_bits{1-0} = undef_bits{1-0};
// CHECK: data['VarObj']['ref_bits'][3] == 1
// CHECK: data['VarObj']['ref_bits'][2] == 0
// CHECK: data['VarObj']['ref_bits'][1]['kind'] == 'varbit'
// CHECK: data['VarObj']['ref_bits'][1]['var'] == 'undef_bits'
// CHECK: data['VarObj']['ref_bits'][1]['index'] == 1
// CHECK: data['VarObj']['ref_bits'][1]['printable'] == 'undef_bits{1}'
// CHECK: data['VarObj']['ref_bits'][0]['kind'] == 'varbit'
// CHECK: data['VarObj']['ref_bits'][0]['var'] == 'undef_bits'
// CHECK: data['VarObj']['ref_bits'][0]['index'] == 0
// CHECK: data['VarObj']['ref_bits'][0]['printable'] == 'undef_bits{0}'
field int complex_ref_int = !add(undef_int, 2);
// CHECK: data['VarObj']['complex_ref_int']['kind'] == 'complex'
// CHECK: data['VarObj']['complex_ref_int']['printable'] == '!add(undef_int, 2)'
}
// Test the !anonymous member. This is tricky because when a def is
// anonymous, almost by definition, the test can't reliably predict
// the name it will be stored under! So we have to search all the defs
// in the JSON output looking for the one that has the test integer
// field set to the right value.
def Named { int AnonTestField = 1; }
// CHECK: data['Named']['AnonTestField'] == 1
// CHECK: data['Named']['!anonymous'] is False
def { int AnonTestField = 2; }
// CHECK: next(rec for rec in data.values() if isinstance(rec, dict) and rec.get('AnonTestField') == 2)['!anonymous'] is True
multiclass AnonTestMulticlass<int base> {
def _plus_one { int AnonTestField = !add(base,1); }
def { int AnonTestField = !add(base,2); }
}
defm NamedDefm : AnonTestMulticlass<10>;
// CHECK: data['NamedDefm_plus_one']['!anonymous'] is False
// CHECK: data['NamedDefm_plus_one']['AnonTestField'] == 11
// CHECK: next(rec for rec in data.values() if isinstance(rec, dict) and rec.get('AnonTestField') == 12)['!anonymous'] is True
// D47431 clarifies that a named def inside a multiclass gives a
// *non*-anonymous output record, even if the defm that instantiates
// that multiclass is anonymous.
defm : AnonTestMulticlass<20>;
// CHECK: next(rec for rec in data.values() if isinstance(rec, dict) and rec.get('AnonTestField') == 21)['!anonymous'] is False
// CHECK: next(rec for rec in data.values() if isinstance(rec, dict) and rec.get('AnonTestField') == 22)['!anonymous'] is True