llvmbot wrote:
@llvm/pr-subscribers-backend-risc-v
Author: Jesse Huang (jaidTw)
Changes
Implement the following implications according to the [Zc
spec](https://github.com/riscvarchive/riscv-code-size-reduction/blob/main/Zc-specification/Zc.adoc#13-c)
> As C defines the same instructions
@@ -25,8 +25,8 @@ addi a0, a1, 0
# CHECK: # encoding: [0xe0,0x1f]
addi s0, sp, 1020
-# CHECK: .option arch, -c
-.option arch, -c
+# CHECK: .option arch, -c, -zca
+.option arch, -c, -zca
kito-cheng wrote:
I guess `.opt arch, -zca` won't work because C will im
https://github.com/lenary commented:
I commented about the predicates (before i saw the other comments). I thought
they'd be ok to do in a follow-up, but you should just to the refactoring now
as it won't quite be NFC as I expected.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/132259
https://github.com/topperc approved this pull request.
LGTM
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/132259
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
llvm-ci wrote:
LLVM Buildbot has detected a new failure on builder `premerge-monolithic-linux`
running on `premerge-linux-1` while building `clang,llvm` at step 7
"test-build-unified-tree-check-all".
Full details are available at:
https://lab.llvm.org/buildbot/#/builders/153/builds/26585
He
llvm-ci wrote:
LLVM Buildbot has detected a new failure on builder `lld-x86_64-ubuntu-fast`
running on `as-builder-4` while building `clang,llvm` at step 6
"test-build-unified-tree-check-all".
Full details are available at:
https://lab.llvm.org/buildbot/#/builders/33/builds/13582
Here is th
llvm-ci wrote:
LLVM Buildbot has detected a new failure on builder
`sanitizer-aarch64-linux-bootstrap-hwasan` running on `sanitizer-buildbot12`
while building `clang,llvm` at step 2 "annotate".
Full details are available at:
https://lab.llvm.org/buildbot/#/builders/55/builds/8811
Here is th
llvm-ci wrote:
LLVM Buildbot has detected a new failure on builder `llvm-x86_64-debian-dylib`
running on `gribozavr4` while building `clang,llvm` at step 8
"test-build-unified-tree-check-lld".
Full details are available at:
https://lab.llvm.org/buildbot/#/builders/60/builds/22785
Here is th
llvm-ci wrote:
LLVM Buildbot has detected a new failure on builder
`llvm-clang-x86_64-gcc-ubuntu` running on `sie-linux-worker3` while building
`clang,llvm` at step 6 "test-build-unified-tree-check-all".
Full details are available at:
https://lab.llvm.org/buildbot/#/builders/174/builds/14962
https://github.com/jaidTw closed
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/132259
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
@@ -378,6 +370,14 @@ def FeatureStdExtZca
"part of the C extension, excluding compressed "
"floating point loads/stores">;
+def FeatureStdExtC
+: RISCVExtension<2, 0, "Compressed Instructions", [FeatureStdExtZca]>,
+ RISCVExte
@@ -25,8 +25,8 @@ addi a0, a1, 0
# CHECK: # encoding: [0xe0,0x1f]
addi s0, sp, 1020
-# CHECK: .option arch, -c
-.option arch, -c
+# CHECK: .option arch, -c, -zca
+.option arch, -c, -zca
topperc wrote:
The code for removing a feature doesn't even try to remov
@@ -378,6 +370,14 @@ def FeatureStdExtZca
"part of the C extension, excluding compressed "
"floating point loads/stores">;
+def FeatureStdExtC
+: RISCVExtension<2, 0, "Compressed Instructions", [FeatureStdExtZca]>,
+ RISCVExte
https://github.com/lenary approved this pull request.
LGTM, with one comment.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/132259
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
https://github.com/lenary edited
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/132259
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
https://github.com/wangpc-pp approved this pull request.
I'd like to give it a LGTM. :-)
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/132259
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commit
kito-cheng wrote:
(Disclaimer: I am not intend to ignite the flames of war about the ISA string
canonicalization!)
Give few more background behind the PR, the issue we want to resolve is the
multilib issue: we starting using `zc*` extension, but we also have user for
using `c` extension, howe
https://github.com/jaidTw created
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/132259
Implement the following implications according to the [Zc
spec](https://github.com/riscvarchive/riscv-code-size-reduction/blob/main/Zc-specification/Zc.adoc#13-c)
> As C defines the same instructions as Zca, Zcf
@@ -856,6 +856,19 @@ void RISCVISAInfo::updateImplication() {
});
}
+ // Add Zcd if C and D are enabled.
+ if (Exts.count("c") && Exts.count("d") && !Exts.count("zcd")) {
+auto Version = findDefaultVersion("zcd");
+Exts["zcd"] = *Version;
+ }
+
+
@@ -378,6 +370,14 @@ def FeatureStdExtZca
"part of the C extension, excluding compressed "
"floating point loads/stores">;
+def FeatureStdExtC
+: RISCVExtension<2, 0, "Compressed Instructions", [FeatureStdExtZca]>,
+ RISCVExte
https://github.com/lenary edited
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/132259
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
@@ -25,8 +25,8 @@ addi a0, a1, 0
# CHECK: # encoding: [0xe0,0x1f]
addi s0, sp, 1020
-# CHECK: .option arch, -c
-.option arch, -c
+# CHECK: .option arch, -c, -zca
+.option arch, -c, -zca
lenary wrote:
This is because your predicates need a little bit of work,
@@ -25,8 +25,8 @@ addi a0, a1, 0
# CHECK: # encoding: [0xe0,0x1f]
addi s0, sp, 1020
-# CHECK: .option arch, -c
-.option arch, -c
+# CHECK: .option arch, -c, -zca
+.option arch, -c, -zca
jaidTw wrote:
I tried but failed, seems like both are required
https://
https://github.com/jaidTw updated
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/132259
>From e147dd68477b7e5ec9e6363a45fd7568fe595b04 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Jesse Huang
Date: Thu, 20 Mar 2025 10:34:14 -0700
Subject: [PATCH 1/2] [RISCV] Implement the implications of C extension
---
.../Cod
@@ -25,8 +25,8 @@ addi a0, a1, 0
# CHECK: # encoding: [0xe0,0x1f]
addi s0, sp, 1020
-# CHECK: .option arch, -c
-.option arch, -c
+# CHECK: .option arch, -c, -zca
+.option arch, -c, -zca
topperc wrote:
Does just `.opt arch, -zca` work?
https://github.com/llv
github-actions[bot] wrote:
:warning: C/C++ code formatter, clang-format found issues in your code.
:warning:
You can test this locally with the following command:
``bash
git-clang-format --diff d0d33d2b5ba3369d4a5586234181055935965e49
e147dd68477b7e5ec9e6363a45fd7568fe595b04 --e
26 matches
Mail list logo
