llvm dev - Apr 2016 - [GPUCC] how to remove _ZL21__nvvm_reflect_anchorv() automatically?

Yeah, '.' is the direct reason for the ptxas failure here.  I'm
curious,
however, about what the purpose of nvvm_reflect_anchorv() is here, and why
does the front-end always generate this function? Since the current PTX
emission doesn't mangle dots, it would be a reasonable workaround for me to
prevent the front-end from generating this function in the first place.
Is there any magic option available to do so?

Thanks!
yuanfeng

On Thu, Apr 7, 2016 at 5:19 PM, Reid Kleckner <rnk at google.com> wrote:
> The actual problem here is that PTX appears to not allow '.' in
symbol
> names. We should probably just change our PTX emission to mangle dots
> somehow.
>
> On Thu, Apr 7, 2016 at 4:24 PM, Yuanfeng Peng via llvm-dev <
> llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote:
>
>> Hi,
>>
>> I needed to compile a cuda source file (say, a.cu) into IR (a.bc), and
>> then merge a.bc with another bitcode file (b.bc, compiled from b.cu).
>> So I used *llvm-link a.bc b.bc -o c.bc*
>>
>> However, I noticed that an internal function '*
_ZL21__nvvm_reflect_anchorv()
>> *' is defined in both a.bc & b.bc, and when merging these two
files, one
>> of the two definitions was renamed to 
'*_ZL21__nvvm_reflect_anchorv.2()*',
>> and written into c.bc.
>>
>>  Then I did *llc c.bc -o c.s -march=nvptx ; ptxas c.s -o c.o*
>>
>> However, ptxas would give the following complaint:
>>
>> *ptxas c.s, line 171; error   : Duplicate definition of function
>> '_ZL21__nvvm_reflect_anchorv'*
>>
>> *ptxas c.s, line 171; fatal   : Parsing error near '.2': syntax
error*
>>
>> So I inspected c.s and found the issue above was caused by the
following
>> line:
>>
>> .*func**  (.param .b32 func_retval0) _ZL21__nvvm_reflect_anchorv.2() //
>> @_ZL21__nvvm_reflect_anchorv.2*
>>
>> After I manually deleted the definition of this function in c.s, the
>> compilation works file.  I wonder how could I force llc to remove  *`*
>> _ZL21__nvvm_reflect_anchorv.2*()`*? Or is that possible to prevent
>> _ZL21__nvvm_reflect_anchorv*() *from being generated into a.bc &
b.bc in
>> the first place?  Or is this possible to ask llvm-link to NOT rename
>> *_ZL21__nvvm_reflect_anchorv() **into **ZL21__nvvm_reflect_anchorv**.2*
>> *()*?
>>
>>
>> Thanks!
>>
>> *Yuanfeng Peng *
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> LLVM Developers mailing list
>> llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org
>> http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-dev
>>
>>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL:
<http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/attachments/20160408/d16939d5/attachment.html>

Artem,

With David's http://reviews.llvm.org/rL265060, do you think
__nvvm_reflect_anchor is still necessary?

On Fri, Apr 8, 2016 at 9:37 AM, Yuanfeng Peng via llvm-dev <
llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote:
> Yeah, '.' is the direct reason for the ptxas failure here.  I'm
curious,
> however, about what the purpose of nvvm_reflect_anchorv() is here, and why
> does the front-end always generate this function? Since the current PTX
> emission doesn't mangle dots, it would be a reasonable workaround for
me to
> prevent the front-end from generating this function in the first place.
> Is there any magic option available to do so?
>
> Thanks!
> yuanfeng
>
> On Thu, Apr 7, 2016 at 5:19 PM, Reid Kleckner <rnk at google.com>
wrote:
>
>> The actual problem here is that PTX appears to not allow '.' in
symbol
>> names. We should probably just change our PTX emission to mangle dots
>> somehow.
>>
>> On Thu, Apr 7, 2016 at 4:24 PM, Yuanfeng Peng via llvm-dev <
>> llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote:
>>
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> I needed to compile a cuda source file (say, a.cu) into IR (a.bc),
and
>>> then merge a.bc with another bitcode file (b.bc, compiled from
b.cu).
>>> So I used *llvm-link a.bc b.bc -o c.bc*
>>>
>>> However, I noticed that an internal function '*
_ZL21__nvvm_reflect_anchorv()
>>> *' is defined in both a.bc & b.bc, and when merging these
two files,
>>> one of the two definitions was renamed to  '
>>> *_ZL21__nvvm_reflect_anchorv.2()*', and written into c.bc.
>>>
>>>  Then I did *llc c.bc -o c.s -march=nvptx ; ptxas c.s -o c.o*
>>>
>>> However, ptxas would give the following complaint:
>>>
>>> *ptxas c.s, line 171; error   : Duplicate definition of function
>>> '_ZL21__nvvm_reflect_anchorv'*
>>>
>>> *ptxas c.s, line 171; fatal   : Parsing error near '.2':
syntax error*
>>>
>>> So I inspected c.s and found the issue above was caused by the
following
>>> line:
>>>
>>> .*func**  (.param .b32 func_retval0)
_ZL21__nvvm_reflect_anchorv.2() //
>>> @_ZL21__nvvm_reflect_anchorv.2*
>>>
>>> After I manually deleted the definition of this function in c.s,
the
>>> compilation works file.  I wonder how could I force llc to remove 
*`*
>>> _ZL21__nvvm_reflect_anchorv.2*()`*? Or is that possible to prevent
>>> _ZL21__nvvm_reflect_anchorv*() *from being generated into a.bc
& b.bc
>>> in the first place?  Or is this possible to ask llvm-link to NOT
rename
>>> *_ZL21__nvvm_reflect_anchorv() **into
**ZL21__nvvm_reflect_anchorv**.2*
>>> *()*?
>>>
>>>
>>> Thanks!
>>>
>>> *Yuanfeng Peng *
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> LLVM Developers mailing list
>>> llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org
>>> http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-dev
>>>
>>>
>>
>
> _______________________________________________
> LLVM Developers mailing list
> llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org
> http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-dev
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL:
<http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/attachments/20160409/497b39e7/attachment.html>

David's change makes nvvm_reflect_anchor unnecessary. The issue with dots
in names generated by llvm still needs to be fixed.
On Apr 9, 2016 8:32 AM, "Jingyue Wu" <jingyue at google.com>
wrote:
> Artem,
>
> With David's http://reviews.llvm.org/rL265060, do you think
> __nvvm_reflect_anchor is still necessary?
>
> On Fri, Apr 8, 2016 at 9:37 AM, Yuanfeng Peng via llvm-dev <
> llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote:
>
>> Yeah, '.' is the direct reason for the ptxas failure here. 
I'm curious,
>> however, about what the purpose of nvvm_reflect_anchorv() is here, and
why
>> does the front-end always generate this function? Since the current PTX
>> emission doesn't mangle dots, it would be a reasonable workaround
for me to
>> prevent the front-end from generating this function in the first place.
>> Is there any magic option available to do so?
>>
>> Thanks!
>> yuanfeng
>>
>> On Thu, Apr 7, 2016 at 5:19 PM, Reid Kleckner <rnk at google.com>
wrote:
>>
>>> The actual problem here is that PTX appears to not allow
'.' in symbol
>>> names. We should probably just change our PTX emission to mangle
dots
>>> somehow.
>>>
>>> On Thu, Apr 7, 2016 at 4:24 PM, Yuanfeng Peng via llvm-dev <
>>> llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Hi,
>>>>
>>>> I needed to compile a cuda source file (say, a.cu) into IR
(a.bc), and
>>>> then merge a.bc with another bitcode file (b.bc, compiled from
b.cu).
>>>> So I used *llvm-link a.bc b.bc -o c.bc*
>>>>
>>>> However, I noticed that an internal function '*
_ZL21__nvvm_reflect_anchorv()
>>>> *' is defined in both a.bc & b.bc, and when merging
these two files,
>>>> one of the two definitions was renamed to  '
>>>> *_ZL21__nvvm_reflect_anchorv.2()*', and written into c.bc.
>>>>
>>>>  Then I did *llc c.bc -o c.s -march=nvptx ; ptxas c.s -o c.o*
>>>>
>>>> However, ptxas would give the following complaint:
>>>>
>>>> *ptxas c.s, line 171; error   : Duplicate definition of
function
>>>> '_ZL21__nvvm_reflect_anchorv'*
>>>>
>>>> *ptxas c.s, line 171; fatal   : Parsing error near
'.2': syntax error*
>>>>
>>>> So I inspected c.s and found the issue above was caused by the
>>>> following line:
>>>>
>>>> .*func**  (.param .b32 func_retval0)
_ZL21__nvvm_reflect_anchorv.2()
>>>> // @_ZL21__nvvm_reflect_anchorv.2*
>>>>
>>>> After I manually deleted the definition of this function in
c.s, the
>>>> compilation works file.  I wonder how could I force llc to
remove  *`*
>>>> _ZL21__nvvm_reflect_anchorv.2*()`*? Or is that possible to
prevent
>>>> _ZL21__nvvm_reflect_anchorv*() *from being generated into a.bc
& b.bc
>>>> in the first place?  Or is this possible to ask llvm-link to
NOT
>>>> rename *_ZL21__nvvm_reflect_anchorv() **into *
>>>> *ZL21__nvvm_reflect_anchorv**.2**()*?
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Thanks!
>>>>
>>>> *Yuanfeng Peng *
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> LLVM Developers mailing list
>>>> llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org
>>>> http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-dev
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> LLVM Developers mailing list
>> llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org
>> http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-dev
>>
>>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL:
<http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/attachments/20160409/58d14c2d/attachment.html>