[PATCH] D122986: [UpdateTestChecks] Add NVPTX support in update_llc_test_checks.py

[Daniil Kovalev via Phabricator via llvm-commits]

kovdan01 added inline comments.


================
Comment at: llvm/utils/UpdateTestChecks/asm.py:460
+      'csky': (scrub_asm_csky, ASM_FUNCTION_CSKY_RE, ':'),
+      'nvptx': (scrub_asm_nvptx, ASM_FUNCTION_NVPTX_RE, '(')
   }
----------------
tra wrote:
> The third field is a `label_suffix`, but it's not clear why it's `(` for NVPTX. 
> AFAICT, PTX does use ':' for the labels: https://cuda.godbolt.org/z/34185xEbY
> 
> Looks like it's supposed to serve as a terminator for the `CHECK-LABEL` (i.e. it's a suffix in terms of FileCheck, but not necessarily in terms of the actual asm labels). 
> This may be something to add to the description of the function return value.
> 
> I wonder if we can incorporate this suffix into a named regex match group, so we don't have to pass it explicitly.
> The third field is a label_suffix, but it's not clear why it's ( for NVPTX.
> AFAICT, PTX does use ':' for the labels: https://cuda.godbolt.org/z/34185xEbY

I suppose that I used a wrong term for naming that, and maybe I should rename that to `function_decl_suffix` or something like this.
Maybe I have missed something, but as far as I understood functions in PTX begin like this - having `(` after function name:

```
.visible .entry square(int *, int)(
        .param .u64 square(int *, int)_param_0,
        .param .u32 square(int *, int)_param_1
)
```

In other assemblies, function "declarations" are just labels looking like `foo:`. So I introduced this new suffix field, because we need to have some marker of function start. Previously, a colon after label was hardcoded.

> I wonder if we can incorporate this suffix into a named regex match group, so we don't have to pass it explicitly.

Unfortunately, that seems to be even more non-transparent - this was the first way that I tried and failed. Regex named group `func` is intended to hold the same function name as IR function has. Here is code from `add_checks` function from common.py:

```
      # If we do not have output for this prefix we skip it.
      if not func_dict[checkprefix][func_name]:
        continue
```

I also don't like that separate suffix field, but have no idea how to get rid of it in a nice way.


Repository:
  rG LLVM Github Monorepo

CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION
  https://reviews.llvm.org/D122986/new/

https://reviews.llvm.org/D122986