search for: addsafepoint

...r the safepoint_17 and then find the locations of the objects? If a patchpoint can work like this, it's probably a good building block for the gc. Currently, we have to declare the root objects with the root intrinsic, then add the appropriate safepoints (it's just a call to GCFunctionInfo.addSafePoint). As root objects are marked as root, modifying GCFunctionInfo.addSafepoint to generate a patchpoint with all the gc roots as argument (instead of using the current infrastructure) should not be difficult. And it probably means that the current gc infrastructure could use patchpoint as a backend. T...

...able(0); + return 0; +} + + GCFunctionInfo *GCStrategy::insertFunctionInfo(const Function &F) { GCFunctionInfo *FI = new GCFunctionInfo(F, *this); Functions.push_back(FI); @@ -370,6 +379,7 @@ MCSymbol* Label = InsertLabel(*CI->getParent(), RAI, CI->getDebugLoc()); FI->addSafePoint(GC::PostCall, Label, CI->getDebugLoc()); } + } void MachineCodeAnalysis::FindSafePoints(MachineFunction &MF) { @@ -405,9 +415,13 @@ // Find the size of the stack frame. FI->setFrameSize(MF.getFrameInfo()->getStackSize()); - + // Find all safe points. - FindSafePoints(M...

I'm moving this to a different thread. I think the newly proposed intrinsic definitions and their current implementation are valuable regardless of how it gets tied into GC... On Oct 22, 2013, at 6:24 PM, Philip R <listmail at philipreames.com> wrote: > Adding Gael as someone who has previously discussed vmkit topics on the list. Since I'm assuming this is where the GC support

Adding Gael as someone who has previously discussed vmkit topics on the list. Since I'm assuming this is where the GC support came from, I wanted to draw this conversation to the attention of someone more familiar with the LLVM implementation than myself. On 10/22/13 4:18 PM, Andrew Trick wrote: > On Oct 22, 2013, at 3:08 PM, Filip Pizlo <fpizlo at apple.com > <mailto:fpizlo