diff options
Diffstat (limited to 'llvm/test/CodeGen/X86/atomic-non-integer-fp128.ll')
| -rw-r--r-- | llvm/test/CodeGen/X86/atomic-non-integer-fp128.ll | 35 |
1 files changed, 35 insertions, 0 deletions
diff --git a/llvm/test/CodeGen/X86/atomic-non-integer-fp128.ll b/llvm/test/CodeGen/X86/atomic-non-integer-fp128.ll new file mode 100644 index 00000000000..a3028e9ac7b --- /dev/null +++ b/llvm/test/CodeGen/X86/atomic-non-integer-fp128.ll @@ -0,0 +1,35 @@ +; NOTE: Assertions have been autogenerated by utils/update_llc_test_checks.py +; RUN: llc < %s -mtriple=x86_64-linux-generic -verify-machineinstrs -mattr=-sse | FileCheck %s --check-prefix=X64-NOSSE +; RUN: llc < %s -mtriple=x86_64-linux-generic -verify-machineinstrs | FileCheck %s --check-prefix=X64-SSE + +; Note: This test is testing that the lowering for atomics matches what we +; currently emit for non-atomics + the atomic restriction. The presence of +; particular lowering detail in these tests should not be read as requiring +; that detail for correctness unless it's related to the atomicity itself. +; (Specifically, there were reviewer questions about the lowering for halfs +; and their calling convention which remain unresolved.) + +define void @store_fp128(fp128* %fptr, fp128 %v) { +; X64-NOSSE-LABEL: store_fp128: +; X64-NOSSE: # %bb.0: +; X64-NOSSE-NEXT: pushq %rax +; X64-NOSSE-NEXT: .cfi_def_cfa_offset 16 +; X64-NOSSE-NEXT: callq __sync_lock_test_and_set_16 +; X64-NOSSE-NEXT: popq %rax +; X64-NOSSE-NEXT: .cfi_def_cfa_offset 8 +; X64-NOSSE-NEXT: retq +; +; X64-SSE-LABEL: store_fp128: +; X64-SSE: # %bb.0: +; X64-SSE-NEXT: subq $24, %rsp +; X64-SSE-NEXT: .cfi_def_cfa_offset 32 +; X64-SSE-NEXT: movaps %xmm0, (%rsp) +; X64-SSE-NEXT: movq (%rsp), %rsi +; X64-SSE-NEXT: movq {{[0-9]+}}(%rsp), %rdx +; X64-SSE-NEXT: callq __sync_lock_test_and_set_16 +; X64-SSE-NEXT: addq $24, %rsp +; X64-SSE-NEXT: .cfi_def_cfa_offset 8 +; X64-SSE-NEXT: retq + store atomic fp128 %v, fp128* %fptr unordered, align 16 + ret void +} |
