This starts moving `X86Builtins.def` to be a tablegen file. It's quite
large, so I think it'd be good to move things in multiple steps to avoid
a bunch of merge conflicts due to the amount of time this takes to
complete.
This set of instructions was only supported by AMD chips starting in
the K6-2 (introduced 1998), and before the "Bulldozer" family
(2011). They were never much used, as they were effectively superseded
by the more-widely-implemented SSE (first implemented on the AMD side
in Athlon XP in 2001).
This is being done as a predecessor towards general removal of MMX
register usage. Since there is almost no usage of the 3DNow!
intrinsics, and no modern hardware even implements them, simple
removal seems like the best option.
(Clang half originally uploaded in https://reviews.llvm.org/D94213)
Works towards issue #41665 and issue #98272.
Printing the raw symbol is useful in inline asm (e.g. getting the C++
mangled name, referencing a symbol in a custom way while ensuring it is
not optimized out even if internal). Similar constraints are available
in other targets (e.g. "S" for aarch64/riscv, "Cs" for m68k).
```
namespace ns { extern int var, a[4]; }
void foo() {
asm(".pushsection .xxx,\"aw\"; .dc.a %p0; .popsection" :: "Ws"(&ns::var));
asm(".reloc ., BFD_RELOC_NONE, %p0" :: "Ws"(&ns::a[3]));
}
```
Link: https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105576
Since Knight Landing and Knight Mill microarchitectures are EOL, we
would like to remove intrinsic supports for its specific ISA in LLVM 19.
In LLVM 18, we will first emit a warning for the usage.
Positive options: -mapx-features=<comma-separated-features>
Negative options: -mno-apx-features=<comma-separated-features>
-m[no-]apx-features is designed to be able to control separate APX
features.
Besides, we also support the flag -m[no-]apxf, which can be used like an
alias of -m[no-]apx-features=< all APX features covered by CPUID APX_F>
Behaviour when positive and negative options are used together:
For boolean flags, the last one wins
-mapxf -mno-apxf -> -mno-apxf
-mno-apxf -mapxf -> -mapxf
For flags that take a set as arguments, it sets the mask by order of the
flags
-mapx-features=egpr,ndd -mno-apx-features=egpr -> -egpr,+ndd
-mapx-features=egpr -mno-apx-features=egpr,ndd -> -egpr,-ndd
-mno-apx-features=egpr -mapx-features=egpr,ndd -> +egpr,+ndd
-mno-apx-features=egpr,ndd -mapx-features=egpr -> -ndd,+egpr
The design is aligned with gcc
https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2023-August/628905.html
This patch relaxes the driver logic to permit combinations between
AVX512 and AVX10 options and makes sure we have a unified behavior
between options and features combination.
Here are rules we are following when handle these combinations:
1. evex512 can only be used for avx512xxx options/features. It will be
ignored if used without them;
2. avx512xxx and avx10.xxx are options in two worlds. Avoid to use them
together in any case. It will enable a common super set when they are
used together. E.g., "-mavx512f -mavx10.1-256" euqals "-mavx10.1-512".
Compiler emits warnings when user using combinations like "-mavx512f
-mavx10.1-256" in case they won't get unexpected result silently.
Function target feature attribute follows the same rule now. We have to
add "no-evex512" feature for intrinsics shared between AVX512 and AVX10.
We also add "no-evex512" for early ISAs like AVX etc., because some of
them are called by AVX512 intrinsics.
This is an alternative of D157485 and a pre-feature to support AVX10.
AVX10 Architecture Specification: https://cdrdv2.intel.com/v1/dl/getContent/784267
AVX10 Technical Paper: https://cdrdv2.intel.com/v1/dl/getContent/784343
RFC: https://discourse.llvm.org/t/rfc-design-for-avx10-feature-support/72661
Based on the feedbacks from LLVM and GCC community, we have agreed to
start from supporting `-m[no-]evex512` on existing AVX512 features.
The option `-mno-evex512` can be used with `-mavx512xxx` to build
binaries that can run on both legacy AVX512 targets and AVX10-256.
There're still arguments about what's the expected behavior when this
option as well as `-mavx512xxx` used together with `-mavx10.1-256`. We
decided to defer the support of `-mavx10.1` after we made consensus.
Or furthermore, we start from supporting AVX10.2 and not providing any
AVX10.1 options.
Reviewed By: RKSimon, skan
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D159250
This is an alternative of D157485 and a pre-feature to support AVX10.
AVX10 Architecture Specification: https://cdrdv2.intel.com/v1/dl/getContent/784267
AVX10 Technical Paper: https://cdrdv2.intel.com/v1/dl/getContent/784343
RFC: https://discourse.llvm.org/t/rfc-design-for-avx10-feature-support/72661
Based on the feedbacks from LLVM and GCC community, we have agreed to
start from supporting `-m[no-]evex512` on existing AVX512 features.
The option `-mno-evex512` can be used with `-mavx512xxx` to build
binaries that can run on both legacy AVX512 targets and AVX10-256.
There're still arguments about what's the expected behavior when this
option as well as `-mavx512xxx` used together with `-mavx10.1-256`. We
decided to defer the support of `-mavx10.1` after we made consensus.
Or furthermore, we start from supporting AVX10.2 and not providing any
AVX10.1 options.
Reviewed By: RKSimon, skan
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D159250
GCC 12 (https://gcc.gnu.org/PR101696) allows
__builtin_cpu_supports("x86-64") (and -v2 -v3 -v4).
This patch ports the feature.
* Add `FEATURE_X86_64_{BASELINE,V2,V3,V4}` to enum ProcessorFeatures,
but keep CPU_FEATURE_MAX unchanged to make
FeatureInfos/FeatureInfos_WithPLUS happy.
* Change validateCpuSupports to allow `x86-64{,-v2,-v3,-v4}`
* Change getCpuSupportsMask to return `std::array<uint32_t, 4>` where
`x86-64{,-v2,-v3,-v4}` set bits `FEATURE_X86_64_{BASELINE,V2,V3,V4}`.
* `target("x86-64")` and `cpu_dispatch(x86_64)` are invalid. Tested by commit 9de3b35ac9159d5bae6e6796cb91e4f877a07189
Close https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/issues/59961
Reviewed By: pengfei
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D158811
