1
0
mirror of https://github.com/RPCS3/llvm-mirror.git synced 2024-10-19 19:12:56 +02:00
Commit Graph

2 Commits

Author SHA1 Message Date
JF Bastien
4730f05bb8 Polish atomic pointers
Summary:
I didn't realize that we already allowed atomic load/store of pointers,
it was added in 2012 by r162146. This patch updates the documentation
and tightens the verifier by using DataLayout to make sure that the
stored size is byte-sized and power-of-two. DataLayout is also used for
integers, and while I'm here I updated the corresponding code for
cmpxchg and rmw.

See the following discussion for context and upcoming changes to
add floating-point and vector atomics:
  https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/llvm-dev/Nh0P_E3CRoo/discussion

Reviewers: reames

Subscribers: llvm-commits

Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D15512

llvm-svn: 255931
2015-12-17 22:09:19 +00:00
Philip Reames
d32c9d5ac8 [IR] Add support for floating pointer atomic loads and stores
This patch allows atomic loads and stores of floating point to be specified in the IR and adds an adapter to allow them to be lowered via existing backend support for bitcast-to-equivalent-integer idiom.

Previously, the only way to specify a atomic float operation was to bitcast the pointer to a i32, load the value as an i32, then bitcast to a float. At it's most basic, this patch simply moves this expansion step to the point we start lowering to the backend.

This patch does not add canonicalization rules to convert the bitcast idioms to the appropriate atomic loads. I plan to do that in the future, but for now, let's simply add the support. I'd like to get instruction selection working through at least one backend (x86-64) without the bitcast conversion before canonicalizing into this form.

Similarly, I haven't yet added the target hooks to opt out of the lowering step I added to AtomicExpand. I figured it would more sense to add those once at least one backend (x86) was ready to actually opt out.

As you can see from the included tests, the generated code quality is not great. I plan on submitting some patches to fix this, but help from others along that line would be very welcome. I'm not super familiar with the backend and my ramp up time may be material.

Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D15471

llvm-svn: 255737
2015-12-16 00:49:36 +00:00