[llvm-dev] Dynamic selection of assembly mnemonic strings

[Bruce Hoult via llvm-dev]

Do instruction aliases do the job?

http://llvm.org/docs/CodeGenerator.html#instruction-alias-processing

Is it ok to have the same source file use LD32 in one instruction but LD.32
in the next one, or do you want different modes?


On Fri, Jul 8, 2016 at 2:24 PM, Martin J. O'Riordan via llvm-dev <
llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote:

> Hi LLVM Dev,
>
>
>
> I have an old problem that I’ve wanted to clean-up for some time.  Our
> chip has gone through a number of iterations in the past few years, but
> with each revision there have been changes to some of the mnemonics for
> instructions.  These are mostly very simple, for example we had a 32-bit
> load from memory instruction named ‘LD32’ in one version of the chip, but
> for a later version this was changed to ‘LD.32’.
>
>
>
> The semantics and schedule remained the same, but in the TD file I had to
> introduce two ‘def’s for this (actually, I abstract a bit more and use a ‘
> defm’):
>
>
>
> def LD32_v1 : Instr<... “LD32” ...>,  Requires<[isV1]>;
>
> def LD32_v2 : Instr<... “LD.32” ...>, Requires<[isV2]>;
>
>
>
> This all works fine, but there is a large number of them which makes
> maintenance difficult.  This also adds to the burden of selection when
> using ‘BuildMI’ in the C++ code, as I have to do things like:
>
>
>
> if (isV1())
>
>   BuildMI(..., TII->get(SHAVE::LD32_v1)
>
> else if (isV2())
>
>   BuildMI(..., TII->get(SHAVE::LD32_v2)
>
>
>
> What I would like, is for some mechanism that can substitute the version
> specific mnemonic dynamically (perhaps using a lookup table), and I could
> reduce the above to just:
>
>
>
> def LD32 : Instr<... “??MetaMnemonic??” ...>;
>
> and:
>
> BuildMI(..., TII->get(SHAVE::LD32)
>
>
>
> Does anyone know how this can be achieved without resort to placing some
> Meta-Mnemonic for ‘??MetaMnemonic??’ and replacing this with the version
> specific value during AsmPrinting?
>
>
>
> Some instructions have more elaborate substitutions, but the general
> principle is the same and there are a large number of instructions that are
> affected which makes the TD files very large, and the conditional ‘BuildMI’
> code overcomplicated.
>
>
>
> Thanks,
>
>
>
>             MartinO
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> LLVM Developers mailing list
> llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org
> http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-dev
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/attachments/20160708/bce8afa8/attachment.html>