[LLVMdev] PBQP & register pairing

[Peter Lawrence]

Arnaud,
                another way to look at it, if the description of your  
register sets includes "pairs",
is that your assembly language syntax for MPQD is redundant,  
operand-2 is the second
half of the register-pair in operand-0,  so an alternative is to let  
llvm think this is a two
operand instruction (one of them being a pair) rather than a three  
operand instruction.

even if you are not currently defining pairs in your register  
definitions, it might be less work
to do that than to write and add an extra new pass.  Many many target  
machines have some
notion of register pairs, so it should not be too hard to find  
examples of how to do this.

YMMV,
-Peter Lawrence.



On Jun 6, 2011, at 10:00 AM, llvmdev-request at cs.uiuc.edu wrote:

>
> Hi All,
>
> My target has some instructions requiring register pairs. I decided  
> to give a try to the PBQP allocator : it is working fine in 99% of  
> the cases, but I am stumbling on the following issue.
>
> Instruction 'MPQD' takes 3 register operands inputs, with the  
> constraint that operands 0 and 2 must be consecutive registers.  
> Operand 1 has no particular constraint. It has no output register.  
> So we have something like MPQD R_n, R_x, R_n+1.
>
> I have derived from PBQPBuilder to add the MPQD constraint.
>
> It happens sometimes that the code for register allocation looks  
> like this :
>   ...
>   MPQD %vreg80, %vreg79, %vreg80; GR16:%vreg80,%vreg79
>   ...
> Operands  0 & 2 have been coalesced and I can no longer set the  
> constraint.
>
> I tried to add a pass right before register allocation, to catch  
> those case and insert a copy for operand 2, but the copy gets  
> coalesced away.
>
> What would be the appropriate way to handle this case ?
>
> Thanks,
> --
> Arnaud de Grandmaison

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/attachments/20110606/3b4332f7/attachment.html>