Lang Hames via llvm-dev
2020-Jul-28 04:01 UTC
[llvm-dev] ORC JIT Weekly #18 -- TargetProcessControl updates for library loading / searching.
Hi All, This was a quiet week -- the only significant ORC change was to the new TargetProcessControl API [1], which acquired the ability to load libraries and search for symbols in the target process in [2]. A new TargetProcessControl based definition generator is included to take advantage of this, and the LLJITWithTargetProcessControl example has been updated to include it. Regards, Lang. [1] http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/2020-July/143532.html [2] https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/commit/13ad00be98e10bb08aeb6eacf8f3aebff653578c -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/attachments/20200727/1138112f/attachment.html>
Stefan Gränitz via llvm-dev
2020-Jul-28 09:50 UTC
[llvm-dev] ORC JIT Weekly #18 -- TargetProcessControl updates for library loading / searching.
Hi Lang Thanks for the update! Is there a conceptual difference between the old: DynamicLibrarySearchGenerator::GetForCurrentProcess(<SystemManglingPrefix>) and the newly added TCP-based one (when applied to the own process): TPCDynamicLibrarySearchGenerator::GetForTargetProcess(SelfTargetProcessControl::Create()) Or can we just assume it the preferred, more generalized approach for constructing definition generators from now on?> Near term ORC work will focus on expanding TargetProcessControl, improving > JITLink's ELF support, ...Sounds great! Cheers Stefan On 28/07/2020 06:01, Lang Hames wrote:> Hi All, > > This was a quiet week -- the only significant ORC change was to the > new TargetProcessControl API [1], which acquired the ability to load > libraries and search for symbols in the target process in [2]. A new > TargetProcessControl based definition generator is included to take > advantage of this, and the LLJITWithTargetProcessControl example has > been updated to include it. > > Regards, > Lang. > > [1] http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/2020-July/143532.html > [2] > https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/commit/13ad00be98e10bb08aeb6eacf8f3aebff653578c >-- https://flowcrypt.com/pub/stefan.graenitz at gmail.com
Lang Hames via llvm-dev
2020-Jul-28 20:15 UTC
[llvm-dev] ORC JIT Weekly #18 -- TargetProcessControl updates for library loading / searching.
Hi Stefan, Thanks for the update! Is there a conceptual difference between the old:> DynamicLibrarySearchGenerator::GetForCurrentProcess(<SystemManglingPrefix>) >and the newly added TCP-based one (when applied to the own process):> > TPCDynamicLibrarySearchGenerator::GetForTargetProcess(SelfTargetProcessControl::Create())There is no conceptual difference. The TargetProcessControl method needs some road-testing, but should eventually be the preferred method. DynamicLibrarySearchGenerator will remain available for quite a while for the sake of clients who can't use TargetProcessControl, e.g. people using RuntimeDyld with a custom memory manager. Regards, Lang. On Tue, Jul 28, 2020 at 2:50 AM Stefan Gränitz <stefan.graenitz at gmail.com> wrote:> Hi Lang > > Thanks for the update! Is there a conceptual difference between the old: > DynamicLibrarySearchGenerator::GetForCurrentProcess(<SystemManglingPrefix>) > > and the newly added TCP-based one (when applied to the own process): > > TPCDynamicLibrarySearchGenerator::GetForTargetProcess(SelfTargetProcessControl::Create()) > > Or can we just assume it the preferred, more generalized approach for > constructing definition generators from now on? > > > Near term ORC work will focus on expanding TargetProcessControl, > improving > > JITLink's ELF support, ... > > Sounds great! > > Cheers > Stefan > > On 28/07/2020 06:01, Lang Hames wrote: > > Hi All, > > > > This was a quiet week -- the only significant ORC change was to the > > new TargetProcessControl API [1], which acquired the ability to load > > libraries and search for symbols in the target process in [2]. A new > > TargetProcessControl based definition generator is included to take > > advantage of this, and the LLJITWithTargetProcessControl example has > > been updated to include it. > > > > Regards, > > Lang. > > > > [1] http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/2020-July/143532.html > > [2] > > > https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/commit/13ad00be98e10bb08aeb6eacf8f3aebff653578c > > > -- > https://flowcrypt.com/pub/stefan.graenitz at gmail.com > > >-------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/attachments/20200728/b27f7f42/attachment.html>
Seemingly Similar Threads
- ORC JIT Weekly #26 -- Orc library break-up, remote TargetProcessControl, and the beginnings of a runtime.
- ORC JIT Weekly #21 -- OrcV1 removal, Removable code, and Remote TargetProcessControl
- Orc JIT vs. STL
- "corrupted size vs. prev_size" when calling ExecutionSession::lookup()
- (How) Can I add C standard libraries to JIT?