This is the groundwork for adding the Armv8.2-A FP16 vector intrinsics, which
uses v4f16 and v8f16 vector operands and return values. All the moving parts
are tested with two intrinsics, a 1-operand v8f16 and a 2-operand v4f16
intrinsic. In a follow-up patch the rest of the intrinsics and tests will be
added.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D44538
llvm-svn: 327839
This is the groundwork for Armv8.2-A FP16 code generation .
Clang passes and returns _Float16 values as floats, together with the required
bitconverts and truncs etc. to implement correct AAPCS behaviour, see D42318.
We will implement half-precision argument passing/returning lowering in the ARM
backend soon, but for now this means that this:
_Float16 sub(_Float16 a, _Float16 b) {
return a + b;
}
gets lowered to this:
define float @sub(float %a.coerce, float %b.coerce) {
entry:
%0 = bitcast float %a.coerce to i32
%tmp.0.extract.trunc = trunc i32 %0 to i16
%1 = bitcast i16 %tmp.0.extract.trunc to half
<SNIP>
%add = fadd half %1, %3
<SNIP>
}
When FullFP16 is *not* supported, we don't make f16 a legal type, and we get
legalization for "free", i.e. nothing changes and everything works as before.
And also f16 argument passing/returning is handled.
When FullFP16 is supported, we do make f16 a legal type, and have 2 places that
we need to patch up: f16 argument passing and returning, which involves minor
tweaks to avoid unnecessary code generation for some bitcasts.
As a "demonstrator" that this works for the different FP16, FullFP16, softfp
modes, etc., I've added match rules to the VSUB instruction description showing
that we can codegen this instruction from IR, but more importantly, also to
some conversion instructions. These conversions were causing issue before in
the FP16 and FullFP16 cases.
I've also added match rules to the VLDRH and VSTRH desriptions, so that we can
actually compile the entire half-precision sub code example above. This showed
that these loads and stores had the wrong addressing mode specified: AddrMode5
instead of AddrMode5FP16, which turned out not be implemented at all, so that
has also been added.
This is the minimal patch that shows all the different moving parts. In patch
2/3 I will add some efficient lowering of bitcasts, and in 2/3 I will add the
remaining Armv8.2-A FP16 instruction descriptions.
Thanks to Sam Parker and Oliver Stannard for their help and reviews!
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D38315
llvm-svn: 323512
Functions that have a dynamic alloca require a base register which is defined to
be X19 on AArch64 and r6 on ARM. We have defined the swifterror register to be
the same register. Use a different callee save register for swifterror instead:
X21 on AArch64
R8 on ARM
rdar://30433803
llvm-svn: 294551
Currently, the Int_eh_sjlj_dispatchsetup intrinsic is marked as
clobbering all registers, including floating-point registers that may
not be present on the target. This is technically true, as we could get
linked against code that does use the FP registers, but that will not
actually work, as the soft-float code cannot save and restore the FP
registers. SjLj exception handling can only work correctly if either all
or none of the code is built for a target with FP registers. Therefore,
we can assume that, when Int_eh_sjlj_dispatchsetup is compiled for a
soft-float target, it is only going to be linked against other
soft-float code, and so only clobbers the general-purpose registers.
This allows us to check that no non-savable registers are clobbered when
generating the prologue/epilogue.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D25180
llvm-svn: 283866
When setting the frame pointer, the offset from SP is calculated based on the
stack slot it gets allocated, but this slot is in turn based on the order of
the CSR list so that list should match the order we actually save the registers
in. Mostly it did, but in the edge-case of MachO AAPCS targets it was wrong.
llvm-svn: 269459
It is very likely that the swiftself parameter is alive throughout most
functions function so putting it into a callee save register should
avoid spills for the callers with only a minimum amount of extra spills
in the callees.
Currently the generated code is correct but unnecessarily spills and
reloads arguments passed in callee save registers, I will address this
in upcoming patches.
This also adds a missing check that for tail calls the preserved value
of the caller must be the same as the callees parameter.
Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D18901
llvm-svn: 266253
We need to be careful on which registers can be explicitly handled
via copies. Prologue, Epilogue use physical registers and if one belongs
to the set of CSRsViaCopy, it will no longer be CSRed, since PEI overwrites
it after the explicit copies.
llvm-svn: 263857
Darwin TLS accesses most closely resemble ELF's general-dynamic situation,
since they have to be able to handle all possible situations. The descriptors
and so on are obviously slightly different though.
llvm-svn: 257039
At the LLVM level this ABI is essentially a minimal modification of AAPCS to
support 16-byte alignment for vector types and the stack.
llvm-svn: 251570
Register r12 ('ip') is used by GCC for this purpose
and hence is used here. As discussed on the GCC mailing
list, the register choice is an ABI issue and so
choosing the same register as GCC means
__builtin_call_with_static_chain is compatible.
A similar patch has just gone in the AArch64 backend,
so this is just the ARM counterpart, following the same
discussion.
Patch by Stephen Cross.
llvm-svn: 241996
The logic is almost there already, with our special homogeneous aggregate
handling. Tweaking it like this allows front-ends to emit AAPCS compliant code
without ever having to count registers or add discarded padding arguments.
Only arrays of i32 and i64 are needed to model AAPCS rules, but I decided to
apply the logic to all integer arrays for more consistency.
llvm-svn: 230348
When using the ARM AAPCS, HFAs (Homogeneous Floating-point Aggregates) must
be passed in a block of consecutive floating-point registers, or on the stack.
This means that unused floating-point registers cannot be back-filled with
part of an HFA, however this can currently happen. This patch, along with the
corresponding clang patch (http://reviews.llvm.org/D3083) prevents this.
llvm-svn: 208413
* CPRCs may be allocated to co-processor registers or the stack – they may never be allocated to core registers
* When a CPRC is allocated to the stack, all other VFP registers should be marked as unavailable
The difference is only noticeable in rare cases where there are a large number of floating point arguments (e.g.
7 doubles + additional float, double arguments). Although it's probably still better to avoid vmov as it can cause
stalls in some older ARM cores. The other, more subtle benefit, is to minimize difference between the various
calling conventions.
rdar://16039676
llvm-svn: 201193
According to the AAPCS, when a CPRC is allocated to the stack, all other
VFP registers should be marked as unavailable.
I have also modified the rules for allocating non-CPRCs to the stack, to make
it more explicit that all GPRs must be made unavailable. I cannot think of a
case where the old version would produce incorrect answers, so there is no test
for this.
llvm-svn: 200970
This function-attribute modifies the callee-saved register list and function
epilogue (specifically the return instruction) so that a routine is suitable
for use as an interrupt-handler of the specified type without disrupting
user-mode applications.
rdar://problem/14207019
llvm-svn: 191766
This is purely academic because GHC calls are always tail calls so the register mask will never be used; however, this change makes the code clearer and brings the ARM implementation of the GHC calling convention in line with the X86 implementation. Also, it might save someone else some time trying to figuring out what is happening...
llvm-svn: 185592
-- C.4 and C.5 statements, when NSAA is not equal to SP.
-- C.1.cp statement for VA functions. Note: There are no VFP CPRCs in a
variadic procedure.
Before this patch "NSAA != 0" means "don't use GPRs anymore ". But there are
some exceptions in AAPCS.
1. For non VA function: allocate all VFP regs for CPRC. When all VFPs are allocated
CPRCs would be sent to stack, while non CPRCs may be still allocated in GRPs.
2. Check that for VA functions all params uses GPRs and then stack.
No exceptions, no CPRCs here.
llvm-svn: 180011
registers. Previously, the register we being marked as implicitly defined, but
not killed. In some cases this would cause the register scavenger to spill a
dead register.
Also, use an empty register mask to simplify the logic and to reduce the memory
footprint.
rdar://12592448
llvm-svn: 167499
callee's responsibility to sign or zero-extend the return value. The additional
test case just checks to make sure the calls are selected (i.e., -fast-isel-abort
doesn't assert).
llvm-svn: 144047
Without this what was happening was:
* R3 is not marked as "used"
* ARM backend thinks it has to save it to the stack because of vaarg
* Offset computation correctly ignores it
* Offsets are wrong
llvm-svn: 110446
Sjoerd Meijer