Hi All, What is the current level of stability of MCJIT using ELF? Thanks. -- ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Braxton McKee Broad Street Analytics www.twitter.com/braxtonmckee www.broadstreetanalytics.com -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/attachments/20120510/0f6d0630/attachment.html>
Hi Braxton, I think it's very good. All of the ExecutionEngine tests pass. I'm not aware of any major defects. I don't believe that the current implementation sets the permissions on JITed memory as you might wish. Namely, I think executable memory may be left writeable and data memory may be executable. The current interface is also somewhat limited. Basically, you pass a Module to the constructor, it JITs that Module immediately and then you can get the address of individual functions to execute them. What is there works though. -Andy From: llvmdev-bounces at cs.uiuc.edu [mailto:llvmdev-bounces at cs.uiuc.edu] On Behalf Of Braxton McKee Sent: Thursday, May 10, 2012 10:53 AM To: llvmdev at cs.uiuc.edu Subject: [LLVMdev] MCJIT Hi All, What is the current level of stability of MCJIT using ELF? Thanks. -- ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Braxton McKee Broad Street Analytics www.twitter.com/braxtonmckee<http://www.twitter.com/braxtonmckee> www.broadstreetanalytics.com<http://www.broadstreetanalytics.com> -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/attachments/20120511/da4cff16/attachment.html>
Can you also tell about inline-asm support in MCJIT for x86? I've been trying to get it to work (my previous post: "JIT support for inline asm on Linux"), I get an error:> LLVM ERROR: Inline asm not supported by this streamer because we don't > have an asm parser for this targetthanks, ashok On 5/11/2012 12:44 PM, Kaylor, Andrew wrote:> Hi Braxton, > > I think it’s very good. All of the ExecutionEngine tests pass. I’m not > aware of any major defects. > > I don’t believe that the current implementation sets the permissions on > JITed memory as you might wish. Namely, I think executable memory may be > left writeable and data memory may be executable. The current interface > is also somewhat limited. Basically, you pass a Module to the > constructor, it JITs that Module immediately and then you can get the > address of individual functions to execute them. What is there works though. > > -Andy > > *From:*llvmdev-bounces at cs.uiuc.edu [mailto:llvmdev-bounces at cs.uiuc.edu] > *On Behalf Of *Braxton McKee > *Sent:* Thursday, May 10, 2012 10:53 AM > *To:* llvmdev at cs.uiuc.edu > *Subject:* [LLVMdev] MCJIT > > Hi All, > > What is the current level of stability of MCJIT using ELF? > > Thanks. > > -- > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- > Braxton McKee Broad Street Analytics > www.twitter.com/braxtonmckee <http://www.twitter.com/braxtonmckee> > www.broadstreetanalytics.com <http://www.broadstreetanalytics.com> > > > > _______________________________________________ > LLVM Developers mailing list > LLVMdev at cs.uiuc.edu http://llvm.cs.uiuc.edu > http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/llvmdev