This sets trackLivenessAfterRegAlloc on AVRRegisterInfo.
Most existing targets set this flag. Without it, specific IR inputs
cause LLVM to fail with:
Assertion failed: (getParent()->getProperties().hasProperty( MachineFunctionProperties::Property::TracksLiveness) &&
"Liveness information is accurate"), function livein_begin
file MachineBasicBlock.cpp, line 1354.
With this commit, this no longer happens.
Patch by Peter Nimmervoll.
llvm-svn: 334409
The test is taken from
https://github.com/avr-rust/rust/issues/57
The originally implementation of struct return lowering was made in
r325474.
Patch by Peter Nimmervoll
llvm-svn: 327967
This patch adds i128 division support by instruction LLVM to lower
128-bit divisions to the __udivmodti4 and __divmodti4 rtlib functions.
This also adds test for 64-bit division and 128-bit division.
Patch by Peter Nimmervoll.
llvm-svn: 327814
Before I started maintaining the AVR backend, this instruction
never originally used to have an earlyclobber flag.
Some time afterwards (years ago), I must've added it back in, not realising that it
was left out for a reason.
This pseudo instrction exists solely to work around a long standing bug
in the register allocator.
Before this commit, the LDDWRdYQ pseudo was not actually working around
any bug. With the earlyclobber flag removed again, the LDDWRdYQ pseudo
now correctly works around PR13375 again.
llvm-svn: 326774
Instead of:
%bb.1: derived from LLVM BB %for.body
print:
bb.1.for.body:
Also use MIR syntax for MBB attributes like "align", "landing-pad", etc.
llvm-svn: 324563
Summary:
This relaxes an assertion inside SelectionDAGBuilder which is overly
restrictive on targets which have no concept of alignment (such as AVR).
In these architectures, all types are aligned to 8-bits.
After this, LLVM will only assert that accesses are aligned on targets
which actually require alignment.
This patch follows from a discussion on llvm-dev a few months ago
http://llvm.1065342.n5.nabble.com/llvm-dev-Unaligned-atomic-load-store-td112815.html
Reviewers: bogner, nemanjai, joerg, efriedma
Reviewed By: efriedma
Subscribers: efriedma, cactus, llvm-commits
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D39946
llvm-svn: 320243
As part of the unification of the debug format and the MIR format, print
MBB references as '%bb.5'.
The MIR printer prints the IR name of a MBB only for block definitions.
* find . \( -name "*.mir" -o -name "*.cpp" -o -name "*.h" -o -name "*.ll" \) -type f -print0 | xargs -0 sed -i '' -E 's/BB#" << ([a-zA-Z0-9_]+)->getNumber\(\)/" << printMBBReference(*\1)/g'
* find . \( -name "*.mir" -o -name "*.cpp" -o -name "*.h" -o -name "*.ll" \) -type f -print0 | xargs -0 sed -i '' -E 's/BB#" << ([a-zA-Z0-9_]+)\.getNumber\(\)/" << printMBBReference(\1)/g'
* find . \( -name "*.txt" -o -name "*.s" -o -name "*.mir" -o -name "*.cpp" -o -name "*.h" -o -name "*.ll" \) -type f -print0 | xargs -0 sed -i '' -E 's/BB#([0-9]+)/%bb.\1/g'
* grep -nr 'BB#' and fix
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D40422
llvm-svn: 319665
As part of the unification of the debug format and the MIR format, avoid
printing "vreg" for virtual registers (which is one of the current MIR
possibilities).
Basically:
* find . \( -name "*.mir" -o -name "*.cpp" -o -name "*.h" -o -name "*.ll" \) -type f -print0 | xargs -0 sed -i '' -E "s/%vreg([0-9]+)/%\1/g"
* grep -nr '%vreg' . and fix if needed
* find . \( -name "*.mir" -o -name "*.cpp" -o -name "*.h" -o -name "*.ll" \) -type f -print0 | xargs -0 sed -i '' -E "s/ vreg([0-9]+)/ %\1/g"
* grep -nr 'vreg[0-9]\+' . and fix if needed
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D40420
llvm-svn: 319427
This test was originally added when an old bug was fixed that caused
broken iterator code to break basic block placement.
The issue has an extremely low chance of every being a problem again.
This specific test is very flaky and fails often due to upstream
changes.
I have removed this test because it negates more value than it returns.
llvm-svn: 318134
Previously, on long branches (relative jumps of >4 kB), an assertion
failure was hit, as AVRInstrInfo::insertIndirectBranch was not
implemented. Despite its name, it is called by the branch relaxator
for *all* unconditional jumps.
Patch by Thomas Backman.
llvm-svn: 314891
In some cases, the code generator attempts to generate instructions such as:
lddw r24, Y+63
which expands to:
ldd r24, Y+63
ldd r25, Y+64 # Oops! This is actually ld r25, Y in the binary
This commit limits the first offset to 62, and thus the second to 63.
It also updates some asserts in AVRExpandPseudoInsts.cpp, including for
INW and OUTW, which appear to be unused.
Patch by Thomas Backman.
llvm-svn: 314890
Also enables '__do_clear_bss'.
These functions are automaticalled called by the CRT if they are
declared.
We need these to be called otherwise RAM will start completely
uninitialised, even though we need to copy RAM variables from progmem to
RAM.
llvm-svn: 312905
We should rewrite this using the generic branch relaxation pass, but for
the moment having this pass is better than hitting an assertion error.
llvm-svn: 307109
Previously, if a basic block ended with a FRMIDX instruction, we would
end up doing something like this.
*std::next(MBB.end())
Which would hit an error:
"Assertion `!NodePtr->isKnownSentinel()' failed."
llvm-svn: 307057
A bunch of tests failed because memory operations have been reordered.
I am unsure which commit changed this behaviour as the AVR build was
failing at that point with an unrelated error.
This commit just reoders some of the CHECK lines in some tests to suit
current llc output.
llvm-svn: 300682
This is recommit of r287553 after fixing the invalid loop info after eliminating an empty block and unit test failures in AVR and WebAssembly :
Summary: Merging an empty case block into the header block of switch could cause ISel to add COPY instructions in the header of switch, instead of the case block, if the case block is used as an incoming block of a PHI. This could potentially increase dynamic instructions, especially when the switch is in a loop. I added a test case which was reduced from the benchmark I was targetting.
Reviewers: t.p.northover, mcrosier, manmanren, wmi, joerg, davidxl
Subscribers: joerg, qcolombet, danielcdh, hfinkel, mcrosier, llvm-commits
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D22696
llvm-svn: 289988