================
@@ -1684,7 +1684,8 @@ void EmitterBase::EmitBuiltinCG(raw_ostream &OS) {
OS << " case ARM::BI__builtin_arm_" << OI.Int->builtinExtension()
<< "_" << OI.Name << ":\n";
for (size_t i = 0, e = MG.ParamTypes.size(); i < e; ++i)
- OS << " Param" << utostr(i) << " = " << OI.ParamValues[i] <<
";\n";
+ OS << " Param" << utostr(i) << " = static_cast<"
+ << MG.ParamTypes[i] << ">(" << OI.ParamValues[i] << ");\n";
----------------
statham-arm wrote:
I'd guessed that much, but I was still confused about why the cast _there_,
when the `static_cast<Align>` was already present in the actual call to
`Builder.CreateMaskedStore`.
But now I've looked at the output of your modified clang-tblgen, I understand:
```c++
case ARM::BI__builtin_arm_mve_vst1q_p_f16:
// ...
case ARM::BI__builtin_arm_mve_vstrwq_p_u32: {
llvm::Type * Param0;
Align Param1;
switch (BuiltinID) {
case ARM::BI__builtin_arm_mve_vst1q_p_f16:
Param0 = static_cast<llvm::Type
*>(llvm::FixedVectorType::get(Builder.getInt1Ty(), 8));
Param1 = static_cast<Align>(2);
break;
// ...
case ARM::BI__builtin_arm_mve_vstrwq_p_u32:
Param0 = static_cast<llvm::Type
*>(llvm::FixedVectorType::get(Builder.getInt1Ty(), 4));
Param1 = static_cast<Align>(4);
break;
}
// ...
return Builder.CreateMaskedStore(Val0, Val2, static_cast<Align>(Param1),
Val5);
}
```
If the cast in the `CreateMaskedStore` were to be enough, it would have to be
because `Param1` had some other type which could be initialized via an integer
literal, and it's easier to add a second cast to the same type than to invent
an appropriate alternative type.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/163790
_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
