Jason Kim
2010-Oct-22 20:52 UTC
[LLVMdev] Fwd: [llvm-commits] Fwd: Proof of concept patch for unifying the .s/ELF emission of .ARM.attributes
---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: Jason Kim <jasonwkim at google.com> Date: Fri, Oct 22, 2010 at 12:59 PM Subject: Re: [llvm-commits] Fwd: Proof of concept patch for unifying the .s/ELF emission of .ARM.attributes To: Rafael Espíndola <rafael.espindola at gmail.com> On Fri, Oct 22, 2010 at 12:51 PM, Jason Kim <jasonwkim at google.com> wrote:> On Thu, Oct 21, 2010 at 11:42 AM, Rafael Espíndola > <rafael.espindola at gmail.com> wrote: >>> Also what is the preferred method for MC way of setting out subsection >>> sizes after the fact? I am guessing I need to use an MCFixup? >>> How do I get an MCExpr to evaluate a method for the subsection size? >>> Is there an equivalent use in the places using MCFixup? >>> Do I need to add a new subclass to MCExpr for doing this? >>> >>> JimG, can you please comment on the MachO specific parts in the >>> ARMAsmPrinter.cpp? Is there an example of a "subsection size" that is >>> "Fixed up" after all the blobs that go into that subsection are >>> emitted? The closest examples I could find weren't that close :-( >>> (Matter of fact, for ELF, it looks like the section sizes are actually >>> calculated after everything has been processed by MCAssembler, and the >>> headers sizes are not "fixed up" but completely rewritten from the >>> beginning) >> >> I really don't follow. Please just convert the current patch to use >> the existing APIs. If in the next one you really need a missing >> feature it will be a lot easier to explain what it is. > > Hi Rafael > > Included are two patches. The first one s06-mod, is the original one. > The s06-brk uses the high level Streamer interface, but currently does > not pass the test I added. > > Please see the comments in the second patch. Hopefully it clarifies > the issues in using the high level MCStreamer interface in emitting > the .ARM.attributes ELF section directly. > It does not seem worthwhile to use the high level Streamer interface > for this kind of work, so I'd very much like some feedback on what > the preferred solution is.Sigh. I sent an earlier patch by mistake for s06-brk. It does not compile, but it should still suffice for demonstration purposes. Sorry for the mess.> > Thanks! > -jason >
Rafael Espíndola
2010-Oct-25 02:01 UTC
[LLVMdev] Fwd: [llvm-commits] Fwd: Proof of concept patch for unifying the .s/ELF emission of .ARM.attributes
I also noticed that we were trying to optimize the output of 41 bytes of data :-) The attached patch is similar to the previous one but drops the API changes by just accumulating the attributes locally before outputting them. Cheers, Rafael -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: attrs.patch Type: text/x-patch Size: 12333 bytes Desc: not available URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/attachments/20101024/1d8074cf/attachment.bin>
Maybe Matching Threads
- [LLVMdev] Fwd: [llvm-commits] Fwd: Proof of concept patch for unifying the .s/ELF emission of .ARM.attributes
- [LLVMdev] Fwd: [llvm-commits] Fwd: Proof of concept patch for unifying the .s/ELF emission of .ARM.attributes
- [LLVMdev] [llvm-commits] Fwd: Proof of concept patch for unifying the .s/ELF emission of .ARM.attributes
- [LLVMdev] [llvm-commits] Fwd: Proof of concept patch for unifying the .s/ELF emission of .ARM.attributes
- [LLVMdev] [llvm-commits] Fwd: Proof of concept patch for unifying the .s/ELF emission of .ARM.attributes