[PATCH] D109362: [SystemZ][z/OS] Add GOFF Support to the DataLayout

This revision was landed with ongoing or failed builds. This revision was automatically updated to reflect the committed changes. anirudhp marked an inline comment as done. Closed by commit rGe09a1dc47515: [SystemZ][z/OS] Add GOFF Support to the DataLayout (authored by anirudhp). Repository: rG

[PATCH] D109362: [SystemZ][z/OS] Add GOFF Support to the DataLayout

anirudhp marked 2 inline comments as done. anirudhp added inline comments. Comment at: clang/test/CodeGen/target-data.c:256 +// RUN: %clang_cc1 -triple s390x-none-zos -o - -emit-llvm %s | \ +// RUN: FileCheck %s -check-prefix=ZOS MaskRay wrote: > MaskRay wrote:

[PATCH] D109362: [SystemZ][z/OS] Add GOFF Support to the DataLayout

anirudhp updated this revision to Diff 373999. anirudhp added a comment. - Reduced the number of test lines in target-data.c, since we don't have to check for every combination of arch,cpu for the SystemZ target (for both elf and z/OS) Repository: rG LLVM Github Monorepo CHANGES SINCE LAST

[PATCH] D109362: [SystemZ][z/OS] Add GOFF Support to the DataLayout

anirudhp added inline comments. Comment at: clang/test/CodeGen/target-data.c:256 +// RUN: %clang_cc1 -triple s390x-none-zos -o - -emit-llvm %s | \ +// RUN: FileCheck %s -check-prefix=ZOS MaskRay wrote: > If you add so many RUN lines at once, please use unittest

[PATCH] D109362: [SystemZ][z/OS] Add GOFF Support to the DataLayout

anirudhp updated this revision to Diff 372737. anirudhp added a comment. - Update to the documentation as well in account for the update to the global prefix. Repository: rG LLVM Github Monorepo CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D109362/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D1093

[PATCH] D109362: [SystemZ][z/OS] Add GOFF Support to the DataLayout

anirudhp added a comment. In D109362#3001294 , @uweigand wrote: > In D109362#3000284 , @anirudhp > wrote: > >> In D109362#2999688 , @uweigand >> wrote: >> >>> Looking at

[PATCH] D109362: [SystemZ][z/OS] Add GOFF Support to the DataLayout

anirudhp updated this revision to Diff 372733. anirudhp added a comment. - Introduce separate label prefix for `MM_GOFF` Repository: rG LLVM Github Monorepo CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D109362/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D109362 Files: clang/lib/Basic/Targets/Sy

[PATCH] D109362: [SystemZ][z/OS] Add GOFF Support to the DataLayout

anirudhp added a comment. In D109362#2999688 , @uweigand wrote: > Looking at the common code parts, it seems the behavior of MM_GOFF is > actually identical to MM_ELF. Is this correct? If so, do we really need a > different format type here? At a f

[PATCH] D109362: [SystemZ][z/OS] Add GOFF Support to the DataLayout

anirudhp added a comment. Ping :) Repository: rG LLVM Github Monorepo CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D109362/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D109362 ___ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org

[PATCH] D109362: [SystemZ][z/OS] Add GOFF Support to the DataLayout

anirudhp updated this revision to Diff 371106. anirudhp added a comment. - Condensed the lit test a bit. Repository: rG LLVM Github Monorepo CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D109362/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D109362 Files: clang/lib/Basic/Targets/SystemZ.h clang/

[PATCH] D109362: [SystemZ][z/OS] Add GOFF Support to the DataLayout

anirudhp created this revision. Herald added subscribers: dexonsmith, jdoerfert, hiraditya. anirudhp requested review of this revision. Herald added projects: clang, LLVM. Herald added subscribers: llvm-commits, cfe-commits. - This patch adds in the GOFF mangling support to the LLVM data layout st

[PATCH] D105142: RFC: Implementing new mechanism for hard register operands to inline asm as a constraint.

anirudhp added a comment. In D105142#2862592 , @jyknight wrote: > This code doesn't handle multiple alternatives in a constraint. > > E.g. `"={eax}{ebx}"` or `"={eax}{ebx},m"`. > > See the GCC docs for the C-level syntax > https://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/g

[PATCH] D105142: RFC: Implementing new mechanism for hard register operands to inline asm as a constraint.

anirudhp added a comment. @MaskRay Could you please look at the latest changeset, I have added your example as a separate test case for the x86 target. Repository: rG LLVM Github Monorepo CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D105142/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D105142 ___

[PATCH] D105142: RFC: Implementing new mechanism for hard register operands to inline asm as a constraint.

anirudhp updated this revision to Diff 356968. anirudhp added a comment. - Something went wrong with the previous time updating the diff. I'm not too sure, but I'm just doing it again, and this time the it looks a lot better. Repository: rG LLVM Github Monorepo CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION ht

[PATCH] D105142: RFC: Implementing new mechanism for hard register operands to inline asm as a constraint.

anirudhp updated this revision to Diff 356961. anirudhp added a comment. - Disable constraint simplification when you already have a constraint of the form {...}. Constraint simplification is usually done character by character, with different targets having different implementations. - Furtherm

[PATCH] D105142: RFC: Implementing new mechanism for hard register operands to inline asm as a constraint.

anirudhp added a comment. In D105142#2860885 , @MaskRay wrote: > This is great. > > unsigned long foo(unsigned long addr, unsigned long a0, > unsigned long a1, unsigned long a2, > unsigned long a3, unsigned long a

[PATCH] D105142: RFC: Implementing new mechanism for hard register operands to inline asm as a constraint.

anirudhp added a comment. In D105142#2849835 , @theraven wrote: > The code looks fine but it would be good to see some docs along with it. > We're currently missing docs on inline assembly entirely and the GCC ones are > somewhat... opaque when it come

[PATCH] D105142: RFC: Implementing new mechanism for hard register operands to inline asm as a constraint.

anirudhp updated this revision to Diff 355332. Repository: rG LLVM Github Monorepo CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D105142/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D105142 Files: clang/include/clang/Basic/TargetInfo.h clang/lib/Basic/TargetInfo.cpp clang/lib/CodeGen/CGStmt.cpp

[PATCH] D105142: RFC: Implementing new mechanism for hard register operands to inline asm as a constraint.

anirudhp created this revision. Herald added subscribers: pengfei, jfb, tpr. anirudhp requested review of this revision. Herald added a project: clang. Herald added a subscriber: cfe-commits. - Relevant RFCs posted here https://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/2021-June/151370.html https://gcc.g

[PATCH] D101462: [MC] Untangle MCContext and MCObjectFileInfo

anirudhp added a comment. Hi @flip1995 My apologies, but you might have to rebase this on the latest main. I introduced a `MCSubtargetInfo` field in https://reviews.llvm.org/D100975. Some of the existing changes to the file may not be needed anymore. Repository: rG LLVM Github Monorepo CHAN

[PATCH] D99072: [NFC] Formatting changes

anirudhp accepted this revision. anirudhp added a comment. This revision is now accepted and ready to land. LGTM Repository: rG LLVM Github Monorepo CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D99072/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D99072 _

[PATCH] D97785: [SystemZ][z/OS] Distinguish between text and binary files on z/OS

anirudhp added a comment. LGTM. Repository: rG LLVM Github Monorepo CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D97785/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D97785 ___ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi

[PATCH] D82862: [ThinLTO] Always parse module level inline asm with At&t dialect

anirudhp added a comment. In D82862#2513044 , @rnk wrote: > In D82862#2512908 , @uweigand wrote: > >> So why do you want GNU inline asm for clang-cl anyway? I thought the whole >> point of clang-cl was to be comp

[PATCH] D85324: [z/OS] Add z/OS Target and define macros

anirudhp added inline comments. Comment at: clang/lib/Basic/Targets/OSTargets.h:745 +if (this->PointerWidth == 64) { + Builder.defineMacro("__64BIT__"); +} abhina.sreeskantharajan wrote: > anirudhp wrote: > > What about the `__LP64__` and the `_LP64`

[PATCH] D85324: [z/OS] Add z/OS Target and define macros

anirudhp added inline comments. Comment at: clang/lib/Basic/Targets/OSTargets.h:745 +if (this->PointerWidth == 64) { + Builder.defineMacro("__64BIT__"); +} What about the `__LP64__` and the `_LP64` macros? Repository: rG LLVM Github Monorepo CHA