llvm dev - Sep 2018 - WebAssembly into normal Target?

Hi Dan,

Sure. That said I think people are just doing it anyhow :)

On Wed, Sep 19, 2018 at 3:59 PM Dan Gohman <sunfish at mozilla.com> wrote:
> Hi Eric,
>
> We've been waiting until we stabilize various key interfaces, including
> the builtin functions, the C ABI, and the .o file format., as we'd like
to
> avoid having users using packaged versions of LLVM producing C/C++ source
> files or .o/.a files that end up being incompatible with newer versions of
> LLVM.
>
> To my knowledge, all of the major issues are fixed now, and the only
> remaining blocker is that we need to decide what to do here:
>
> https://reviews.llvm.org/D43675 (Rename imported/exported memory symbol
> to __linear_memory)
>
>
On the bright side we just had a release so you'll have 6 mos to get that
ironed out? :)

Anyhow, can't tell if this is an objection on your part or not?

-eric

> Dan
>
>
> On Wed, Sep 19, 2018 at 2:46 PM, Eric Christopher <echristo at
gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> Hi All,
>>
>> WebAssembly has been around for a while now, it's still being
actively
>> worked on and used. I think it's long past time we make it a normal
target
>> so that it gets tested on a regular basis. (Most recent random breakage
is
>> https://reviews.llvm.org/rL342576 which fails make check with web
>> assembly enabled).
>>
>> Any objections? I'll probably do this next week unless someone
raises a
>> strong objection here.
>>
>> Thanks!
>>
>> -eric
>>
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL:
<http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/attachments/20180919/1d862cbc/attachment.html>

Hi Eric,

On Wed, Sep 19, 2018 at 5:33 PM, Eric Christopher <echristo at gmail.com>
wrote:
> Hi Dan,
>
> Sure. That said I think people are just doing it anyhow :)
>
> On Wed, Sep 19, 2018 at 3:59 PM Dan Gohman <sunfish at mozilla.com>
wrote:
>
>> Hi Eric,
>>
>> We've been waiting until we stabilize various key interfaces,
including
>> the builtin functions, the C ABI, and the .o file format., as we'd
like to
>> avoid having users using packaged versions of LLVM producing C/C++
source
>> files or .o/.a files that end up being incompatible with newer versions
of
>> LLVM.
>>
>> To my knowledge, all of the major issues are fixed now, and the only
>> remaining blocker is that we need to decide what to do here:
>>
>> https://reviews.llvm.org/D43675 (Rename imported/exported memory symbol
>> to __linear_memory)
>>
>>
> On the bright side we just had a release so you'll have 6 mos to get
that
> ironed out? :)
>
That's a good point. I think we can commit to fixing that issue in 6 months
:-).

I checked in the patch enabling the WebAssembly target, but some of the
buildbots found a memory leak (MCSymbolWasm has dynamically allocated
memory, but MCSymbol destructors are never run), so I reverted the change
for now. As soon as we fix that issue, we should be good to re-enable.

Dan
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL:
<http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/attachments/20180920/4c31226d/attachment.html>

Great, thanks! :)

On Thu, Sep 20, 2018 at 8:38 PM Dan Gohman <sunfish at mozilla.com> wrote:
> Hi Eric,
>
> On Wed, Sep 19, 2018 at 5:33 PM, Eric Christopher <echristo at
gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> Hi Dan,
>>
>> Sure. That said I think people are just doing it anyhow :)
>>
>> On Wed, Sep 19, 2018 at 3:59 PM Dan Gohman <sunfish at
mozilla.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Hi Eric,
>>>
>>> We've been waiting until we stabilize various key interfaces,
including
>>> the builtin functions, the C ABI, and the .o file format., as
we'd like to
>>> avoid having users using packaged versions of LLVM producing C/C++
source
>>> files or .o/.a files that end up being incompatible with newer
versions of
>>> LLVM.
>>>
>>> To my knowledge, all of the major issues are fixed now, and the
only
>>> remaining blocker is that we need to decide what to do here:
>>>
>>> https://reviews.llvm.org/D43675 (Rename imported/exported memory
symbol
>>> to __linear_memory)
>>>
>>>
>> On the bright side we just had a release so you'll have 6 mos to
get that
>> ironed out? :)
>>
>
> That's a good point. I think we can commit to fixing that issue in 6
> months :-).
>
> I checked in the patch enabling the WebAssembly target, but some of the
> buildbots found a memory leak (MCSymbolWasm has dynamically allocated
> memory, but MCSymbol destructors are never run), so I reverted the change
> for now. As soon as we fix that issue, we should be good to re-enable.
>
> Dan
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL:
<http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/attachments/20180920/6de3d946/attachment.html>