LLVM currently treats the first operand of MVCK as if it were a
regular base+index+displacement address. However, it is in fact
a base+displacement combined with a length register field.
While the two might look syntactically similar, there are two
semantic differences:
- %r0 is a valid length register, even though it cannot be used
as an index register.
- In an expression with just a single register like 0(%rX), the
register is treated as base with normal addresses, while it is
treated as the length register (with an empty base) for MVCK.
Fixed by adding a new operand parser class BDRAddr and reworking
the assembler parser to distinguish between address + length
register operands and regular addresses.
llvm-svn: 285574
This patch adds support for the z13 processor type and its vector facility,
and adds MC support for all new instructions provided by that facilily.
Apart from defining the new instructions, the main changes are:
- Adding VR128, VR64 and VR32 register classes.
- Making FP64 a subclass of VR64 and FP32 a subclass of VR32.
- Adding a D(V,B) addressing mode for scatter/gather operations
- Adding 1-, 2-, and 3-bit immediate operands for some 4-bit fields.
Until now all immediate operands have been the same width as the
underlying field (hence the assert->return change in decode[SU]ImmOperand).
In addition, sys::getHostCPUName is extended to detect running natively
on a z13 machine.
Based on a patch by Richard Sandiford.
llvm-svn: 236520
This is the first use of D(L,B) addressing, which required a fair bit
of surgery. For that reason, the patch just adds the instruction
definition and the associated assembler and disassembler support.
A later patch will actually make use of it for codegen.
llvm-svn: 185433
Previously, an invalid instruction like:
foo %r1, %r0
would generate the rather odd error message:
....: error: unknown token in expression
foo %r1, %r0
^
We now get the more informative:
....: error: invalid instruction
foo %r1, %r0
^
The same would happen if an address were used where a register was expected.
We now get "invalid operand for instruction" instead.
llvm-svn: 182644
Ulrich Weigand