[llvm-dev] DFAPacketizer assert failure

[Krzysztof Parzyszek via llvm-dev]

On 11/16/2015 2:08 PM, Rail Shafigulin wrote:
>     It's hard to make a guess based on that assertion alone.  Apparently
>     there is no transition in the DFA for these values.
>
>     Do the arguments (e.g. CurrentState and FuncUnits) look reasonable?
>
> FuncUnits = 0
> CurrentState = 0
> StateTrans = {first = 0, second = 0}
>
> I understand that there is something wrong with the state machine but I
> can't figure out what exactly. My scheduler description is the same as
> for Hexagon or R600. So why would DFA would look any different for my
> target? What could be the problem?

Does the instruction that is being added have an itinerary associated 
with it?

I'm not sure what you mean when you say that your scheduler description 
is the same as for Hexagon or R600.  Those two are very different and 
whatever you have, it cannot be the same as both of them.

-Krzysztof

-- 
Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. is a member of Code Aurora Forum, 
hosted by The Linux Foundation