llvm dev - Jun 2009 - [LLVMdev] What happened to the -fast flag for lli?

Hi there,

I think I've found a bug in the x86 JIT. I get an assertion failure when 
using thread-local variables and the fast emitter.
It only happens with the JIT, the fast emiiter and thread-locals.
(The IR passes the verifier)

Here's the failure:

X86CodeEmitter.cpp:516: void<unnamed>::Emitter::emitInstruction(const 
llvm::MachineInstr&, const llvm::TargetInstrDesc*): Assertion `0 && 
"psuedo instructions should be removed before code emission"'
failed.

There is a problem with submitting a bug-report, however.
Since llc has no trouble with thread-locals, I cannot actually generate 
the assertion failure, without my compiler-generator.
I can dump out the IR, but it is rather large.

So,
Is there a way to get llc to use the same emitter as the JIT, so that I
can produce a reasonably sized test-case.

I tried the -fast flag, but it compiles correctly.

Cheers,
Mark.

Mark Shannon wrote:
> So,
> Is there a way to get llc to use the same emitter as the JIT, so that I
> can produce a reasonably sized test-case.
> 
> I tried the -fast flag, but it compiles correctly.
Did you try using lli instead of llc?

Hi Mark,

Can't we run "lli -fast" on your .bc file instead of llc?

Nicolas

Mark Shannon wrote:
> Hi there,
>
> I think I've found a bug in the x86 JIT. I get an assertion failure
when
> using thread-local variables and the fast emitter.
> It only happens with the JIT, the fast emiiter and thread-locals.
> (The IR passes the verifier)
>
> Here's the failure:
>
> X86CodeEmitter.cpp:516: void<unnamed>::Emitter::emitInstruction(const
> llvm::MachineInstr&, const llvm::TargetInstrDesc*): Assertion `0
&&
> "psuedo instructions should be removed before code emission"'
failed.
>
> There is a problem with submitting a bug-report, however.
> Since llc has no trouble with thread-locals, I cannot actually generate 
> the assertion failure, without my compiler-generator.
> I can dump out the IR, but it is rather large.
>
> So,
> Is there a way to get llc to use the same emitter as the JIT, so that I
> can produce a reasonably sized test-case.
>
> I tried the -fast flag, but it compiles correctly.
>
> Cheers,
> Mark.
> _______________________________________________
> LLVM Developers mailing list
> LLVMdev at cs.uiuc.edu         http://llvm.cs.uiuc.edu
> http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/llvmdev
>

Nicolas, Frits,

I can't run lli directly, because there is no 'main' in my .bc file,
but I should be able to construct a test case.

Thanks,
Mark

Nicolas Geoffray wrote:
> Hi Mark,
> 
> Can't we run "lli -fast" on your .bc file instead of llc?
> 
> Nicolas
Frits van Bommel wrote:
 >
 > Did you try using lli instead of llc?

X86 JIT does not yet support TLS.

Evan
On Jun 12, 2009, at 2:48 AM, Mark Shannon wrote:
> Hi there,
>
> I think I've found a bug in the x86 JIT. I get an assertion failure  
> when
> using thread-local variables and the fast emitter.
> It only happens with the JIT, the fast emiiter and thread-locals.
> (The IR passes the verifier)
>
> Here's the failure:
>
> X86CodeEmitter.cpp:516: void<unnamed>::Emitter::emitInstruction(const
> llvm::MachineInstr&, const llvm::TargetInstrDesc*): Assertion `0
&&
> "psuedo instructions should be removed before code emission"'
failed.
>
> There is a problem with submitting a bug-report, however.
> Since llc has no trouble with thread-locals, I cannot actually  
> generate
> the assertion failure, without my compiler-generator.
> I can dump out the IR, but it is rather large.
>
> So,
> Is there a way to get llc to use the same emitter as the JIT, so  
> that I
> can produce a reasonably sized test-case.
>
> I tried the -fast flag, but it compiles correctly.
>
> Cheers,
> Mark.
> _______________________________________________
> LLVM Developers mailing list
> LLVMdev at cs.uiuc.edu         http://llvm.cs.uiuc.edu
> http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/llvmdev

Evan,

Any plans to add it any time soon?
It would be really appreciated.

Evan Cheng wrote:
> X86 JIT does not yet support TLS.
> 
> Evan
> On Jun 12, 2009, at 2:48 AM, Mark Shannon wrote:
> 
>> Hi there,
>>
>> I think I've found a bug in the x86 JIT. I get an assertion failure
>> when
>> using thread-local variables and the fast emitter.
>> It only happens with the JIT, the fast emiiter and thread-locals.
>> (The IR passes the verifier)
>>
>> Here's the failure:
>>
>> X86CodeEmitter.cpp:516:
void<unnamed>::Emitter::emitInstruction(const
>> llvm::MachineInstr&, const llvm::TargetInstrDesc*): Assertion `0
&&
>> "psuedo instructions should be removed before code
emission"' failed.
>>
>> There is a problem with submitting a bug-report, however.
>> Since llc has no trouble with thread-locals, I cannot actually  
>> generate
>> the assertion failure, without my compiler-generator.
>> I can dump out the IR, but it is rather large.
>>
>> So,
>> Is there a way to get llc to use the same emitter as the JIT, so  
>> that I
>> can produce a reasonably sized test-case.
>>
>> I tried the -fast flag, but it compiles correctly.
>>
>> Cheers,
>> Mark.
>> _______________________________________________
>> LLVM Developers mailing list
>> LLVMdev at cs.uiuc.edu         http://llvm.cs.uiuc.edu
>> http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/llvmdev
> 
> _______________________________________________
> LLVM Developers mailing list
> LLVMdev at cs.uiuc.edu         http://llvm.cs.uiuc.edu
> http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/llvmdev
>

Hi,

I've just installed llvm from trunk and
lli seems to have lost the -fast option.

Can we have it back please?

Mark.