search for: __builtins

Hi all, currently we lower the __builtin_setjmp/__builtin_longjmp intrinsincs to SjLj exception style intrinsics. For ARM on non-Darwin, they end up as nops, breaking Ruby. This leads to the question of what the defined semantics of them is. (a) Are they supposed to be compatible with libc? PPC disagrees in comments. (b) Are they supposed to be compatible with GCC? If not with libc, why with

...them again in the generated LLVM IR. The client then just > needs a header declaring the functions and information on what they > mean. Since there are never any definitions of them they won't end up > going anywhere. > > A more ambitious plan would be to modify llvm-gcc with new __builtins > and create intrinsics in LLVM to map them to. There's really no > advantage to this other than not needing the header file while > compiling. There's a big disadvantage in that you end up mucking with > both the front end and the llvm intrinsics. > > Finally, you can mod...

...calls and then find them again in the generated LLVM IR. The client then just needs a header declaring the functions and information on what they mean. Since there are never any definitions of them they won't end up going anywhere. A more ambitious plan would be to modify llvm-gcc with new __builtins and create intrinsics in LLVM to map them to. There's really no advantage to this other than not needing the header file while compiling. There's a big disadvantage in that you end up mucking with both the front end and the llvm intrinsics. Finally, you can modify llvm-gcc pragma handl...

...targets where there is no machine level linked library, a correct TargetLibraryInfo would report no supported library functions, disabling optimizations on that function. Ideally we could specify libcalls as another function defined in the IR, but that is a separate problem. 3. Consistency. Some __builtins emit the llvm intrinsics, and others do not. 4. It seems unnatural to me to emit a special DAG node for specific calls, then for most targets to later on expand it again as a call later. 5. Eliminate redundant code. Places like ConstantFolding currently have to handle the intrinsic and the libcal...

Hello Is there a "generic" pragma that is supported by LLVM and is visible by optimization passes? or any other way for a programmer to pass meta-data information to the compiler? I am writing an analysis pass that could benefit from user provided information. At this stage, I could like to keep the kind of information that the user can provide as general as possible.

...nerated LLVM IR. The client then just >> needs a header declaring the functions and information on what they >> mean. Since there are never any definitions of them they won't end up >> going anywhere. >> >> A more ambitious plan would be to modify llvm-gcc with new __builtins >> and create intrinsics in LLVM to map them to. There's really no >> advantage to this other than not needing the header file while >> compiling. There's a big disadvantage in that you end up mucking with >> both the front end and the llvm intrinsics. >> >&...