A later change will add a 3rd user, so factoring out the common code
seems useful.
Reorganizing the executeInWaterfallLoop causes some more COPYs to be
generated, but those all fold away during instruction selection.
Generating the comparisons uses generic instructions over machine
instructions now which admittedly shouldn't make a difference
(though it should make it easier to move the waterfall loop generation
to another place).
(Resubmit with missing test added.)
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D125324
A later change will add a 3rd user, so factoring out the common code
seems useful.
Reorganizing the executeInWaterfallLoop causes some more COPYs to be
generated, but those all fold away during instruction selection.
Generating the comparisons uses generic instructions over machine
instructions now which admittedly shouldn't make a difference
(though it should make it easier to move the waterfall loop generation
to another place).
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D125324
This will currently accept the old number of bytes syntax, and convert
it to a scalar. This should be removed in the near future (I think I
converted all of the tests already, but likely missed a few).
Not sure what the exact syntax and policy should be. We can continue
printing the number of bytes for non-generic instructions to avoid
test churn and only allow non-scalar types for generic instructions.
This will currently print the LLT in parentheses, but accept parsing
the existing integers and implicitly converting to scalar. The
parentheses are a bit ugly, but the parser logic seems unable to deal
without either parentheses or some keyword to indicate the start of a
type.
Buffer_load does unsigned offset calculations. Don't fold
operands of 32-bit add that are likely to cause unsigned add
overflow (common case is when one of the operands is negative).
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D91336
We were executing this in a waterfall loop as a placeholder, but this
should really be converted to a MUBUF load. Also execute in a
waterfall loop if the resource isn't an SGPR. This is a case where the
DAG handling was wrong because doing the right thing was too hard.
Currently, this will mishandle 96-bit loads. There's currently no way
to track the original memory size with an MMO, so these loads will be
widened andd the resulting memory size will be 128-bits.
