[LLVMdev] Lowering operations to 8-bit!

[Alireza.Moshtaghi at microchip.com]

ExpandOp is not called at all.
In SelectionDAGLegalize::HandleOp() only the ValueType is considered in
the switch statement to decide if it is legal or promote or expand.
As I trace back (correct me if I'm wrong) these values are set in
TargetLowering::computeRegisterProperties() and it is based on the
largest register class (in my case the smallest possible pointer size,
16-bit)
So it reduces everything down to 16-bit and pretty much ignores the fact
that ADD of i16 is supposed to be expanded. 

Am I doing the right analysis?

Ali.

-----Original Message-----
From: llvmdev-bounces at cs.uiuc.edu [mailto:llvmdev-bounces at cs.uiuc.edu]
On Behalf Of Chris Lattner
Sent: Friday, September 28, 2007 1:55 PM
To: LLVM Developers Mailing List
Subject: Re: [LLVMdev] Lowering operations to 8-bit!


On Sep 28, 2007, at 1:10 PM, <Alireza.Moshtaghi at microchip.com>  
<Alireza.Moshtaghi at microchip.com> wrote:

> Attached please find the gdb backtrace dump and the postscript file of
> the DAG right before assertion.
> The red Node is the current Node in LegalizeOp()

Okay, this is the problem.  LegalizeOp should only be called on a  
node if the VT is valid for the target.  In this case, ExpandOp  
should have been called to split the register up.  I'd suggest going  
up the stack to figure out who called LegalizeOp instead of ExpandOp.

> Here is my code in the formalizing arguments (copied ISD::MERGE_VALUES
> from PowerPC implementation, not sure if it is really needed)

MergeValues is required because the FORMAL_ARGUMENTs node returns one  
value for each argument input to the function, and also a chain  
value.  These have to match up correctly.

-Chris
_______________________________________________
LLVM Developers mailing list
LLVMdev at cs.uiuc.edu         http://llvm.cs.uiuc.edu
http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/llvmdev