Update the Programmer's Reference document.
Add a test. Update a couple of tests with an improved error message.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D90635
The TableGen range piece punctuator is currently '-' (e.g., {0-9}),
which interacts oddly with the fact that an integer literal's sign
is part of the literal. This patch replaces the '-' with the new
punctuator '...'. The '-' punctuator is deprecated.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D85585
Change-Id: I3d53d14e23f878b142d8f84590dd465a0fb6c09c
TGParser::ParseValue contains two recursive calls, one to parse the RHS of a list paste operator and one to parse the RHS of a paste operator in a class/def name. Both of these calls neglect to check the return value to see if it is null (because of some error). This causes a crash in the next line of code, which uses the return value. The code now checks for null returns.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D85852
Replace Twine.h/SourceMgr.h includes with forward declarations and include in TGParser.cpp
Remove forward declarations we already have to include in Record.h
Summary:
There are a few field init values that are concrete but not complete/foldable (e.g. `?`). This allows for using those values as initializers without erroring out.
Example:
```
class A {
string value = ?;
}
class B<A impl> : A {
let value = impl.value; // This currently emits an error.
let value = ?; // This doesn't emit an error.
}
```
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D74360
Summary:
The following example gives the error message "expected value of type
'bits<32>', got 'bit'" on the assignment.
class Instruction { bits<32> encoding; }
def foo: Instruction { let encoding{10} = !eq(0, 1); }
But there's nothing wrong with this code: 'bit' is a perfectly good
type for the RHS of an assignment to a //single bit// of an
instruction encoding.
The problem is that `ParseBodyItem` is accidentally type-checking the
RHS against the full type of the `encoding` field, without adjusting
it in the case where we're only assigning to a subset of the bits. The
fix is trivial.
Reviewers: nhaehnle, hfinkel
Reviewed By: hfinkel
Subscribers: hiraditya, llvm-commits
Tags: #llvm
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D74220
This is how it should've been and brings it more in line with
std::string_view. There should be no functional change here.
This is mostly mechanical from a custom clang-tidy check, with a lot of
manual fixups. It uncovers a lot of minor inefficiencies.
This doesn't actually modify StringRef yet, I'll do that in a follow-up.
Summary:
This allows you to make some of the defs in a multiclass or `foreach`
conditional on an expression computed from the parameters or iteration
variables.
It was already possible to simulate an if statement using a `foreach`
with a dummy iteration variable and a list constructed using `!if` so
that it had length 0 or 1 depending on the condition, e.g.
foreach unusedIterationVar = !if(condition, [1], []<int>) in { ... }
But this syntax is nicer to read, and also more convenient because it
allows an else clause.
To avoid upheaval in the implementation, I've implemented `if` as pure
syntactic sugar on the `foreach` implementation: internally, `ParseIf`
actually does construct exactly the kind of foreach shown above (and
another reversed one for the else clause if present).
Reviewers: nhaehnle, hfinkel
Reviewed By: hfinkel
Subscribers: hiraditya, llvm-commits
Tags: #llvm
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D71474
Summary:
This allows you to define a global or local variable to an arbitrary
value, and refer to it in subsequent definitions.
The main use I anticipate for this is if you have to compute some
difficult function of the parameters of a multiclass, and then use it
many times. For example:
multiclass Foo<int i, string s> {
defvar op = !cast<BaseClass>("whatnot_" # s # "_" # i);
def myRecord {
dag a = (op this, (op that, the other), (op x, y, z));
int b = op.subfield;
}
def myOtherRecord<"template params including", op>;
}
There are a couple of ways to do this already, but they're not really
satisfactory. You can replace `defvar x = y` with a loop over a
singleton list, `foreach x = [y] in { ... }` - but that's unintuitive
to someone who hasn't seen that workaround idiom before, and requires
an extra pair of braces that you often didn't really want. Or you can
define a nested pair of multiclasses, with the inner one taking `x` as
a template parameter, and the outer one instantiating it just once
with the desired value of `x` computed from its other parameters - but
that makes it awkward to sequentially compute each value based on the
previous ones. I think `defvar` makes things considerably easier.
You can also use `defvar` at the top level, where it inserts globals
into the same map used by `defset`. That allows you to define global
constants without having to make a dummy record for them to live in:
defvar MAX_BUFSIZE = 512;
// previously:
// def Dummy { int MAX_BUFSIZE = 512; }
// and then refer to Dummy.MAX_BUFSIZE everywhere
Reviewers: nhaehnle, hfinkel
Reviewed By: hfinkel
Subscribers: hiraditya, llvm-commits
Tags: #llvm
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D71407
Summary:
These allow you to get and set the operator of a dag node, without
affecting its list of arguments.
`!getop` is slightly fiddly because in many contexts you need its
return value to have a static type more specific than 'any record'. It
works to say `!cast<BaseClass>(!getop(...))`, but it's cumbersome, so
I made `!getop` take an optional type suffix itself, so that can be
written as the shorter `!getop<BaseClass>(...)`.
Reviewers: hfinkel, nhaehnle
Reviewed By: nhaehnle
Subscribers: hiraditya, llvm-commits
Tags: #llvm
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D71191
This is not a new semantic feature. The syntax `(? 1, 2, 3)` was
disallowed by the parser in a dag //expression//, but there were
already ways to sneak a `?` into the operator field of a dag
//value//, e.g. by initializing it from a class template parameter
which is then set to `?` by the instantiating `def`.
This patch makes `?` in the operator slot syntactically legal, so it's
now easy to construct dags with an unset operator. Also, the semantics
of `!con` are relaxed so that it will allow a combination of set and
unset operator fields in the dag nodes it's concatenating, with the
restriction that all the operators that are //not// unset still have
to agree with each other.
Reviewers: hfinkel, nhaehnle
Reviewed By: hfinkel, nhaehnle
Subscribers: hiraditya, llvm-commits
Tags: #llvm
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D71195
Summary:
Most libraries are defined in the lib/ directory but there are also a
few libraries defined in tools/ e.g. libLLVM, libLTO. I'm defining
"Component Libraries" as libraries defined in lib/ that may be included in
libLLVM.so. Explicitly marking the libraries in lib/ as component
libraries allows us to remove some fragile checks that attempt to
differentiate between lib/ libraries and tools/ libraires:
1. In tools/llvm-shlib, because
llvm_map_components_to_libnames(LIB_NAMES "all") returned a list of
all libraries defined in the whole project, there was custom code
needed to filter out libraries defined in tools/, none of which should
be included in libLLVM.so. This code assumed that any library
defined as static was from lib/ and everything else should be
excluded.
With this change, llvm_map_components_to_libnames(LIB_NAMES, "all")
only returns libraries that have been added to the LLVM_COMPONENT_LIBS
global cmake property, so this custom filtering logic can be removed.
Doing this also fixes the build with BUILD_SHARED_LIBS=ON
and LLVM_BUILD_LLVM_DYLIB=ON.
2. There was some code in llvm_add_library that assumed that
libraries defined in lib/ would not have LLVM_LINK_COMPONENTS or
ARG_LINK_COMPONENTS set. This is only true because libraries
defined lib lib/ use LLVMBuild.txt and don't set these values.
This code has been fixed now to check if the library has been
explicitly marked as a component library, which should now make it
easier to remove LLVMBuild at some point in the future.
I have tested this patch on Windows, MacOS and Linux with release builds
and the following combinations of CMake options:
- "" (No options)
- -DLLVM_BUILD_LLVM_DYLIB=ON
- -DLLVM_LINK_LLVM_DYLIB=ON
- -DBUILD_SHARED_LIBS=ON
- -DBUILD_SHARED_LIBS=ON -DLLVM_BUILD_LLVM_DYLIB=ON
- -DBUILD_SHARED_LIBS=ON -DLLVM_LINK_LLVM_DYLIB=ON
Reviewers: beanz, smeenai, compnerd, phosek
Reviewed By: beanz
Subscribers: wuzish, jholewinski, arsenm, dschuff, jyknight, dylanmckay, sdardis, nemanjai, jvesely, nhaehnle, mgorny, mehdi_amini, sbc100, jgravelle-google, hiraditya, aheejin, fedor.sergeev, asb, rbar, johnrusso, simoncook, apazos, sabuasal, niosHD, jrtc27, MaskRay, zzheng, edward-jones, atanasyan, steven_wu, rogfer01, MartinMosbeck, brucehoult, the_o, dexonsmith, PkmX, jocewei, jsji, dang, Jim, lenary, s.egerton, pzheng, sameer.abuasal, llvm-commits
Tags: #llvm
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D70179
This error was originally added a while(7 years) ago when
including multiple files was basically always an error. Tablegen
now has preprocessor support, which allows for building nice
c/c++ style include guards. With the current error being
reported, we unfortunately need to double guard when including
files:
* In user of MyFile.td
#ifndef MYFILE_TD
include MyFile.td
#endif
* In MyFile.td
#ifndef MYFILE_TD
#define MYFILE_TD
...
#endif
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D70410
Using `?` as an optional marker is very useful in Clang's AST-node
emitters because otherwise we need a separate class just to encode
the presence or absence of a base node reference.
Summary:
This is just moving the existing C++ code around and will be NFC w.r.t
AArch64. Renamed 'CombineBr' to something more descriptive
('ElideByByInvertingCond') at the same time.
The remaining combines in AArch64PreLegalizeCombiner require features that
aren't implemented at this point and will be hoisted as they are added.
Depends on D68424
Reviewers: bogner, volkan
Subscribers: kristof.beyls, hiraditya, Petar.Avramovic, llvm-commits
Tags: #llvm
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D68426
llvm-svn: 375057
Summary:
While working with DagInit's, it's often the case that you expect the
operator to be a reference to a def. This patch adds a wrapper for this
common case to reduce the amount of boilerplate callers need to duplicate
repeatedly.
getOperatorAsDef() returns the record if the DagInit has an operator that is
a DefInit. Otherwise, it prints a fatal error.
There's only a few pre-existing examples in LLVM at the moment and I've
left a few instances of the code this simplifies as they had more specific
error messages than the generic one this produces. I'm going to be using
this a fair bit in my subsequent patches.
Reviewers: bogner, volkan, nhaehnle
Reviewed By: nhaehnle
Subscribers: nhaehnle, hiraditya, asb, rbar, johnrusso, simoncook, apazos, sabuasal, niosHD, jrtc27, MaskRay, zzheng, edward-jones, rogfer01, MartinMosbeck, brucehoult, the_o, PkmX, jocewei, lenary, s.egerton, pzheng, llvm-commits
Tags: #llvm
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D68424
llvm-svn: 374101
Paul C. Anagnostopoulos