maxjhandsome
/
llvm-project
forked from OSchip/llvm-project
1
0
Fork 0
Code Issues Pull Requests Packages Releases Wiki Activity
llvm-project/llvm/test/CodeGen/AMDGPU/regcoalesce-dbg.mir

77 lines
2.9 KiB
Plaintext
Raw Normal View History

[RegisterCoalescer] Do not call getInstructionIndex with DBG_VALUE An assert occurs when calling SlotIndexes::getInstructionIndex with a DBG_VALUE instruction because the function expects an instruction with a slot index. However, there is no slot index for a DBG_VALUE instruction. Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D29048 llvm-svn: 294070
2017-02-04 08:10:22 +08:00
# RUN: llc -march=amdgcn -run-pass simple-register-coalescing -o - %s | FileCheck %s
# Test that register coalescing does not allow a call to
# LIS->getInstructionIndex with a DBG_VALUE instruction, which does not have
# a slot index.
MIR: Print the register class or bank in vreg defs This updates the MIRPrinter to include the regclass when printing virtual register defs, which is already valid syntax for the parser. That is, given 64 bit %0 and %1 in a "gpr" regbank, %1(s64) = COPY %0(s64) would now be written as %1:gpr(s64) = COPY %0(s64) While this change alone introduces a bit of redundancy with the registers block, it allows us to update the tests to be more concise and understandable and brings us closer to being able to remove the registers block completely. Note: We generally only print the class in defs, but there is one exception. If there are uses without any defs whatsoever, we'll print the class on all uses. I'm not completely convinced this comes up in meaningful machine IR, but for now the MIRParser and MachineVerifier both accept that kind of stuff, so we don't want to have a situation where we can print something we can't parse. llvm-svn: 316479
2017-10-25 02:04:54 +08:00
# CHECK: %13.sub2:sgpr_128 = S_MOV_B32 0
[RegisterCoalescer] Do not call getInstructionIndex with DBG_VALUE An assert occurs when calling SlotIndexes::getInstructionIndex with a DBG_VALUE instruction because the function expects an instruction with a slot index. However, there is no slot index for a DBG_VALUE instruction. Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D29048 llvm-svn: 294070
2017-02-04 08:10:22 +08:00
# CHECK: DBG_VALUE{{.*}}debug-use %13.sub2
--- |
AMDGPU: Mark all unspecified CC functions in tests as amdgpu_kernel Currently the default C calling convention functions are treated the same as compute kernels. Make this explicit so the default calling convention can be changed to a non-kernel. Converted with perl -pi -e 's/define void/define amdgpu_kernel void/' on the relevant test directories (and undoing in one place that actually wanted a non-kernel). llvm-svn: 298444
2017-03-22 05:39:51 +08:00
define amdgpu_kernel void @test(i32 addrspace(1)* %out) { ret void }
MIR: Print the register class or bank in vreg defs This updates the MIRPrinter to include the regclass when printing virtual register defs, which is already valid syntax for the parser. That is, given 64 bit %0 and %1 in a "gpr" regbank, %1(s64) = COPY %0(s64) would now be written as %1:gpr(s64) = COPY %0(s64) While this change alone introduces a bit of redundancy with the registers block, it allows us to update the tests to be more concise and understandable and brings us closer to being able to remove the registers block completely. Note: We generally only print the class in defs, but there is one exception. If there are uses without any defs whatsoever, we'll print the class on all uses. I'm not completely convinced this comes up in meaningful machine IR, but for now the MIRParser and MachineVerifier both accept that kind of stuff, so we don't want to have a situation where we can print something we can't parse. llvm-svn: 316479
2017-10-25 02:04:54 +08:00
[RegisterCoalescer] Do not call getInstructionIndex with DBG_VALUE An assert occurs when calling SlotIndexes::getInstructionIndex with a DBG_VALUE instruction because the function expects an instruction with a slot index. However, there is no slot index for a DBG_VALUE instruction. Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D29048 llvm-svn: 294070
2017-02-04 08:10:22 +08:00
!0 = distinct !DICompileUnit(language: DW_LANG_C99, file: !4, producer: "llvm", isOptimized: true, runtimeVersion: 0, emissionKind: FullDebug, enums: !4, retainedTypes: !4)
!1 = !DILocalVariable(name: "a", scope: !2, file: !4, line: 126, type: !6)
[DebugInfo] Add DILabel metadata and intrinsic llvm.dbg.label. In order to set breakpoints on labels and list source code around labels, we need collect debug information for labels, i.e., label name, the function label belong, line number in the file, and the address label located. In order to keep these information in LLVM IR and to allow backend to generate debug information correctly. We create a new kind of metadata for labels, DILabel. The format of DILabel is !DILabel(scope: !1, name: "foo", file: !2, line: 3) We hope to keep debug information as much as possible even the code is optimized. So, we create a new kind of intrinsic for label metadata to avoid the metadata is eliminated with basic block. The intrinsic will keep existing if we keep it from optimized out. The format of the intrinsic is llvm.dbg.label(metadata !1) It has only one argument, that is the DILabel metadata. The intrinsic will follow the label immediately. Backend could get the label metadata through the intrinsic's parameter. We also create DIBuilder API for labels to be used by Frontend. Frontend could use createLabel() to allocate DILabel objects, and use insertLabel() to insert llvm.dbg.label intrinsic in LLVM IR. Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D45024 Patch by Hsiangkai Wang. llvm-svn: 331841
2018-05-09 10:40:45 +08:00
!2 = distinct !DISubprogram(name: "test", scope: !4, file: !4, line: 1, type: !3, isLocal: false, isDefinition: true, scopeLine: 2, flags: DIFlagPrototyped, isOptimized: true, unit: !0, retainedNodes: !5)
[RegisterCoalescer] Do not call getInstructionIndex with DBG_VALUE An assert occurs when calling SlotIndexes::getInstructionIndex with a DBG_VALUE instruction because the function expects an instruction with a slot index. However, there is no slot index for a DBG_VALUE instruction. Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D29048 llvm-svn: 294070
2017-02-04 08:10:22 +08:00
!3 = !DISubroutineType(types: !4)
!4 = !{null}
!5 = !{!1}
!6 = !DIDerivedType(tag: DW_TAG_pointer_type, baseType: !7, size: 64, align: 32)
!7 = !DIBasicType(name: "int", size: 32, align: 32, encoding: DW_ATE_signed)
!8 = !DIExpression()
!9 = !DILocation(line: 126, column: 9, scope: !2)
...
---
name: test
tracksRegLiveness: true
MIR: Print the register class or bank in vreg defs This updates the MIRPrinter to include the regclass when printing virtual register defs, which is already valid syntax for the parser. That is, given 64 bit %0 and %1 in a "gpr" regbank, %1(s64) = COPY %0(s64) would now be written as %1:gpr(s64) = COPY %0(s64) While this change alone introduces a bit of redundancy with the registers block, it allows us to update the tests to be more concise and understandable and brings us closer to being able to remove the registers block completely. Note: We generally only print the class in defs, but there is one exception. If there are uses without any defs whatsoever, we'll print the class on all uses. I'm not completely convinced this comes up in meaningful machine IR, but for now the MIRParser and MachineVerifier both accept that kind of stuff, so we don't want to have a situation where we can print something we can't parse. llvm-svn: 316479
2017-10-25 02:04:54 +08:00
registers:
[RegisterCoalescer] Do not call getInstructionIndex with DBG_VALUE An assert occurs when calling SlotIndexes::getInstructionIndex with a DBG_VALUE instruction because the function expects an instruction with a slot index. However, there is no slot index for a DBG_VALUE instruction. Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D29048 llvm-svn: 294070
2017-02-04 08:10:22 +08:00
- { id: 0, class: sgpr_64 }
- { id: 1, class: sreg_32_xm0 }
- { id: 2, class: sgpr_32 }
- { id: 3, class: vgpr_32 }
- { id: 4, class: sreg_64_xexec }
- { id: 5, class: sreg_32_xm0_xexec }
- { id: 6, class: sreg_32 }
- { id: 7, class: sreg_32 }
- { id: 8, class: sreg_32_xm0 }
- { id: 9, class: sreg_64 }
- { id: 10, class: sreg_32_xm0 }
- { id: 11, class: sreg_32_xm0 }
- { id: 12, class: sgpr_64 }
- { id: 13, class: sgpr_128 }
- { id: 14, class: sreg_32_xm0 }
- { id: 15, class: sreg_64 }
- { id: 16, class: vgpr_32 }
- { id: 17, class: vreg_64 }
- { id: 18, class: vgpr_32 }
- { id: 19, class: vreg_64 }
- { id: 20, class: vreg_64 }
MIR: Print the register class or bank in vreg defs This updates the MIRPrinter to include the regclass when printing virtual register defs, which is already valid syntax for the parser. That is, given 64 bit %0 and %1 in a "gpr" regbank, %1(s64) = COPY %0(s64) would now be written as %1:gpr(s64) = COPY %0(s64) While this change alone introduces a bit of redundancy with the registers block, it allows us to update the tests to be more concise and understandable and brings us closer to being able to remove the registers block completely. Note: We generally only print the class in defs, but there is one exception. If there are uses without any defs whatsoever, we'll print the class on all uses. I'm not completely convinced this comes up in meaningful machine IR, but for now the MIRParser and MachineVerifier both accept that kind of stuff, so we don't want to have a situation where we can print something we can't parse. llvm-svn: 316479
2017-10-25 02:04:54 +08:00
liveins:
Followup on Proposal to move MIR physical register namespace to '$' sigil. Discussed here: http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/2018-January/120320.html In preparation for adding support for named vregs we are changing the sigil for physical registers in MIR to '$' from '%'. This will prevent name clashes of named physical register with named vregs. llvm-svn: 323922
2018-02-01 06:04:26 +08:00
- { reg: '$sgpr0_sgpr1', virtual-reg: '%0' }
- { reg: '$vgpr0', virtual-reg: '%3' }
[RegisterCoalescer] Do not call getInstructionIndex with DBG_VALUE An assert occurs when calling SlotIndexes::getInstructionIndex with a DBG_VALUE instruction because the function expects an instruction with a slot index. However, there is no slot index for a DBG_VALUE instruction. Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D29048 llvm-svn: 294070
2017-02-04 08:10:22 +08:00
body: |
bb.0:
Followup on Proposal to move MIR physical register namespace to '$' sigil. Discussed here: http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/2018-January/120320.html In preparation for adding support for named vregs we are changing the sigil for physical registers in MIR to '$' from '%'. This will prevent name clashes of named physical register with named vregs. llvm-svn: 323922
2018-02-01 06:04:26 +08:00
liveins: $sgpr0_sgpr1, $vgpr0
MIR: Print the register class or bank in vreg defs This updates the MIRPrinter to include the regclass when printing virtual register defs, which is already valid syntax for the parser. That is, given 64 bit %0 and %1 in a "gpr" regbank, %1(s64) = COPY %0(s64) would now be written as %1:gpr(s64) = COPY %0(s64) While this change alone introduces a bit of redundancy with the registers block, it allows us to update the tests to be more concise and understandable and brings us closer to being able to remove the registers block completely. Note: We generally only print the class in defs, but there is one exception. If there are uses without any defs whatsoever, we'll print the class on all uses. I'm not completely convinced this comes up in meaningful machine IR, but for now the MIRParser and MachineVerifier both accept that kind of stuff, so we don't want to have a situation where we can print something we can't parse. llvm-svn: 316479
2017-10-25 02:04:54 +08:00
Followup on Proposal to move MIR physical register namespace to '$' sigil. Discussed here: http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/2018-January/120320.html In preparation for adding support for named vregs we are changing the sigil for physical registers in MIR to '$' from '%'. This will prevent name clashes of named physical register with named vregs. llvm-svn: 323922
2018-02-01 06:04:26 +08:00
%3 = COPY killed $vgpr0
%0 = COPY killed $sgpr0_sgpr1
AMDGPU: Fix tests using old number for constant address space llvm-svn: 341770
2018-09-10 10:54:25 +08:00
%4 = S_LOAD_DWORDX2_IMM %0, 9, 0 :: (non-temporal dereferenceable invariant load 8 from `i64 addrspace(4)* undef`)
%5 = S_LOAD_DWORD_IMM killed %0, 13, 0 :: (non-temporal dereferenceable invariant load 4 from `i32 addrspace(4)* undef`)
Followup on Proposal to move MIR physical register namespace to '$' sigil. Discussed here: http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/2018-January/120320.html In preparation for adding support for named vregs we are changing the sigil for physical registers in MIR to '$' from '%'. This will prevent name clashes of named physical register with named vregs. llvm-svn: 323922
2018-02-01 06:04:26 +08:00
%18 = V_ASHRREV_I32_e32 31, %3, implicit $exec
[RegisterCoalescer] Do not call getInstructionIndex with DBG_VALUE An assert occurs when calling SlotIndexes::getInstructionIndex with a DBG_VALUE instruction because the function expects an instruction with a slot index. However, there is no slot index for a DBG_VALUE instruction. Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D29048 llvm-svn: 294070
2017-02-04 08:10:22 +08:00
undef %19.sub0 = COPY killed %3
%19.sub1 = COPY killed %18
%10 = S_MOV_B32 61440
%11 = S_MOV_B32 0
Followup on Proposal to move MIR physical register namespace to '$' sigil. Discussed here: http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/2018-January/120320.html In preparation for adding support for named vregs we are changing the sigil for physical registers in MIR to '$' from '%'. This will prevent name clashes of named physical register with named vregs. llvm-svn: 323922
2018-02-01 06:04:26 +08:00
DBG_VALUE debug-use %11, debug-use $noreg, !1, !8, debug-location !9
[RegisterCoalescer] Do not call getInstructionIndex with DBG_VALUE An assert occurs when calling SlotIndexes::getInstructionIndex with a DBG_VALUE instruction because the function expects an instruction with a slot index. However, there is no slot index for a DBG_VALUE instruction. Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D29048 llvm-svn: 294070
2017-02-04 08:10:22 +08:00
undef %12.sub0 = COPY killed %11
%12.sub1 = COPY killed %10
undef %13.sub0_sub1 = COPY killed %4
%13.sub2_sub3 = COPY killed %12
Followup on Proposal to move MIR physical register namespace to '$' sigil. Discussed here: http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/2018-January/120320.html In preparation for adding support for named vregs we are changing the sigil for physical registers in MIR to '$' from '%'. This will prevent name clashes of named physical register with named vregs. llvm-svn: 323922
2018-02-01 06:04:26 +08:00
%20 = V_LSHL_B64 killed %19, 2, implicit $exec
[RegisterCoalescer] Do not call getInstructionIndex with DBG_VALUE An assert occurs when calling SlotIndexes::getInstructionIndex with a DBG_VALUE instruction because the function expects an instruction with a slot index. However, there is no slot index for a DBG_VALUE instruction. Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D29048 llvm-svn: 294070
2017-02-04 08:10:22 +08:00
%16 = COPY killed %5
Followup on Proposal to move MIR physical register namespace to '$' sigil. Discussed here: http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/2018-January/120320.html In preparation for adding support for named vregs we are changing the sigil for physical registers in MIR to '$' from '%'. This will prevent name clashes of named physical register with named vregs. llvm-svn: 323922
2018-02-01 06:04:26 +08:00
BUFFER_STORE_DWORD_ADDR64 killed %16, killed %20, killed %13, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, implicit $exec :: (store 4 into %ir.out)
[RegisterCoalescer] Do not call getInstructionIndex with DBG_VALUE An assert occurs when calling SlotIndexes::getInstructionIndex with a DBG_VALUE instruction because the function expects an instruction with a slot index. However, there is no slot index for a DBG_VALUE instruction. Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D29048 llvm-svn: 294070
2017-02-04 08:10:22 +08:00
S_ENDPGM
...