[PATCH] D37654: PPC: Don't select lxv/stxv for insufficiently aligned stack slots.
Hal Finkel via llvm-commits
llvm-commits at lists.llvm.org
Mon Sep 11 17:29:50 PDT 2017
On 09/11/2017 06:45 PM, Kyle Butt wrote:
> No, it failed to emit any code. The frame index fixup code scavenges a
> Register to materialize the offset. Nothing reserves an emergency
> spill slot for the scavenging. Boom!
>
> I'm thinking of adjusting the slot to be sufficiently aligned.
That also seems reasonable (although the the correctness fix seems good
regardless).
-Hal
>
> On Sep 9, 2017 1:46 AM, "Nemanja Ivanovic" <nemanja.i.ibm at gmail.com
> <mailto:nemanja.i.ibm at gmail.com>> wrote:
>
> Ah, OK good. So I imagine it failed the machine verifier.
> That's good - as long as we don't emit bad code :)
>
> On Sat, Sep 9, 2017 at 9:54 AM, Eric Christopher
> <echristo at gmail.com <mailto:echristo at gmail.com>> wrote:
>
> It failed in the register scavenger :)
>
>
> On Fri, Sep 8, 2017, 11:46 PM Nemanja Ivanovic via Phabricator
> <reviews at reviews.llvm.org <mailto:reviews at reviews.llvm.org>>
> wrote:
>
> nemanjai added a comment.
>
> I imagine this patch was prompted by a bug. Just out of
> curiosity, did the assert:
>
> assert(MO.isImm() && !(MO.getImm() % 16) &&
> "Expecting an immediate that is a multiple of 16");
>
> fire for the case where the frame op was lowered to an
> lxv/stxv with an offset that isn't a multiple of 16? If
> not, perhaps we need another assert somewhere else?
>
>
> Repository:
> rL LLVM
>
> https://reviews.llvm.org/D37654
> <https://reviews.llvm.org/D37654>
>
>
>
>
--
Hal Finkel
Lead, Compiler Technology and Programming Languages
Leadership Computing Facility
Argonne National Laboratory
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-commits/attachments/20170911/778b1272/attachment-0001.html>
More information about the llvm-commits
mailing list