Hello all,

I wan to ask, what is exactly the purpose of TSFlags and can it be used for the condition handling in instructions?

How can I implement the conditions in the instruction when I don’t have access to the Status Register?

Best regards,


These are target-specific flags that are then stored in the instruction descriptor. You can use them to encode various properties of the instruction that are of interest to your target.

I'm not sure what you mean about condition handling, but TSFlags are "static" in the sense that for a given opcode they remain fixed throughout compilation. For conditional instructions you can have a flag there that says that the instruction is conditional, but any variable characteristics must be encoded in other ways.


Many thanks for your prompt reply.

I mean, imagine you have 3 bits for condition flags in your instruction (e.g. overflow, zero, carry set, …) for conditional executions AND there is no direct access to the Status Register, is it even possible to implement such scenario?

There doesn't have to be any explicit status register. You can either create separate instructions for each condition, or have the condition as an extra operand. Let's take "add" for example. You could have several versions of add:
   add add unconditionally
   addc add if carry
   addz add if zero
   addo add if overflow
and similarly for more complex conditions that your target could support, such as "carry or zero". This has the disadvantage that the instruction set can get really large, but if the number of conditional instructions is small or if the possible conditions vary from one operation to another, this may be a viable solution.
The other option is to model the condition as an operand (I think ARM does that). So the add instruction could look like this:
   R0 = add R1, R2, C
   C = 0: no conditions
   C = 1: zero
   C = 2: carry
   C = 4: overflow

This way the instruction set would remain small, but it may involve special handling for it to work with the integrated assembler (if the native instruction format is different than what you chose).

You could use the TSFlags to indicate for each instruction which condition this instruction can modify. Taking the add again, it could modify all of the three: zero, carry and overflow, but a load could only modify zero (for example, specifics would depend on your target).


Dear Krzysztof,

That was really much of help. I did go through the ARM code trying to understand it.

One question that I have is, how “s” and “p” get initialized? for example in this code that I copied from ARMInstrFormats.td

// Same as I except it can optionally modify CPSR. Note it’s modeled as an input
// operand since by default it’s a zero register. It will become an implicit def
// once it’s “flipped”.
class sI<dag oops, dag iops, AddrMode am, int sz,
IndexMode im, Format f, InstrItinClass itin,
string opc, string asm, string cstr,
list pattern>
: InstARM<am, sz, im, f, GenericDomain, cstr, itin> {
bits<4> p; // Predicate operand
bits<1> s; // condition-code set flag (‘1’ if the insn should set the flags)
let Inst{31-28} = p;
let Inst{20} = s;

let OutOperandList = oops;
let InOperandList = !con(iops, (ins pred:$p, cc_out:$s));
let AsmString = !strconcat(opc, “${s}${p}”, asm);
let Pattern = pattern;
list Predicates = [IsARM];

The same for TSFlags; when I want to used them for condition handling, how do they get initialized?

All the "bits" variables (such as "s" and "p" below) are initialized from the values of the instruction operands. The statement
   let InOperandList = !con(iops, (ins pred:$p, cc_out:$s));
concatenates the input operands provided so far with two extra ones: p and s. The values corresponding to these arguments will be used to initialize "s" and "p".

For the initialization of the TSFlags, check the definition of InstTemplate in the same file:

class InstTemplate<AddrMode am, int sz, IndexMode im,
                    Format f, Domain d, string cstr, InstrItinClass itin>
   : Instruction {
   let Namespace = "ARM";

   // The layout of TSFlags should be kept in sync with ARMBaseInfo.h.
   let TSFlags{4-0} = AM.Value;
   let TSFlags{6-5} = IndexModeBits;
   let TSFlags{12-7} = Form;
   let TSFlags{13} = isUnaryDataProc;
   let TSFlags{14} = canXformTo16Bit;
   let TSFlags{17-15} = D.Value;
   let TSFlags{18} = thumbArithFlagSetting;


You can get the final list of all records created by table-gen from the input .td files using this command (SRC = path to the LLVM sources):

llvm-tblgen -print-records -I SRC/lib/Target/ARM -I SRC/lib/Target -I SRC/include SRC/lib/Target/ARM/ARM.td -o output

Then, in the output file you can look at the actual definitions of all instructions after all macros/classes/etc have been processed. You were looking at class sI, so let's find where sI is used:

We find that (for example) ADCri inherits from sI (the commented line shows all parent classes):

def ADCri { // Instruction InstTemplate Encoding InstARM sI AsI1 Requires Sched ri
   field bits<32> Inst = { p{3}, p{2}, p{1}, p{0}, 0, 0, 1, 0, 1, 0, 1, s{0}, Rn{3}, Rn{2}, Rn{1}, Rn{0}, Rd{3}, Rd{2}, Rd{1}, Rd{0}, imm{11}, imm{10}, imm{9}, imm{8}, imm{7}, imm{6}, imm{5}, imm{4}, imm{3}, imm{2}, imm{1}, imm{0} };
   field bits<32> Unpredictable = { 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0 };
   field bits<32> SoftFail = { 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0 };
   string Namespace = "ARM";
   dag OutOperandList = (outs GPR:$Rd);
   dag InOperandList = (ins GPR:$Rn, mod_imm:$imm, pred:$p, cc_out:$s);
   string AsmString = "adc${s}${p} $Rd, $Rn, $imm";

You can see that the InOperandList contains 4 operands: Rn, imm, p and s. This is where the values used for instruction encoding will be taken from.


Hi Krzystof,

regarding your first solution (creating separate instruction), is it possible to somehow have cascading defm?

for example, let’s suppose aaa is a 3-bit condition a, and bb is a 2-bit condition b, all in one instruction, instead of having one multiclass with 2^5 conditions, is it possible to write 2^3 “a” conditions, and 2^2 “b” conditions, and the rest taken care by the TableGen?

huh, stupid question, found it on the TableGen docs