Displaying 20 results from an estimated 386 matches for "asmparsers".
Did you mean:
asmparser
2006 Jan 11
4
[LLVMdev] Re: [llvm-commits] CVS: llvm/lib/AsmParser/Lexer.cpp Lexer.l
I can't build LLVM CFE after this patchs
http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/pipermail/llvm-commits/Week-of-Mon-20060109/030639.html
http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/pipermail/llvm-commits/Week-of-Mon-20060109/030654.html
Build terminated with messages:
--8X----------------------------------------------
llvm[2]: Compiling Lexer.cpp for Debug build
In file included from
2006 Jan 11
0
[LLVMdev] Re: [llvm-commits] CVS: llvm/lib/AsmParser/Lexer.cpp Lexer.l
On Wed, 11 Jan 2006, Vladimir A. Merzliakov wrote:
> I can't build LLVM CFE after this patchs
> http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/pipermail/llvm-commits/Week-of-Mon-20060109/030639.html
> http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/pipermail/llvm-commits/Week-of-Mon-20060109/030654.html
This is most likely because you have conflict markers in the generated
files in the lib/AsmParser directory. Try removing
2006 Jan 11
1
[LLVMdev] Re: [llvm-commits] CVS: llvm/lib/AsmParser/Lexer.cpp Lexer.l
For VC++, I solved this by having bison/flex put the files into the obj
directories. I also have it unconditionally regenerate the files if
bison/flex is available, and copy them from src if they are not.
Chris Lattner wrote:
> On Wed, 11 Jan 2006, Vladimir A. Merzliakov wrote:
>
>> I can't build LLVM CFE after this patchs
>>
2006 Jan 11
1
[LLVMdev] Re: [llvm-commits] CVS: llvm/lib/AsmParser/Lexer.cpp Lexer.l
No solutions come to mind. Conflicts are conflicts and must be resolved
manually. This situation should only occur if you change the .l/.y file
and then update the .h/.cpp files after someone else has changed
the .l/.y file and regenerated the .h and .cpp. That doesn't seem like a
high frequency scenario that we need to worry about. Not sure there's
much we could do even if it was.
Reid.
2009 Jan 08
1
[LLVMdev] Build failure on x86_64
Hello!
I see the following build failure of the sources at the top of the trunk, on
x86_64.
make[2]: Entering directory `<llvm-root>/build/llvm/lib/AsmParser'
llvm[2]: Compiling LLLexer.cpp for Release build
llvm[2]: Compiling LLParser.cpp for Release build
<llvm-root>/src/llvm/lib/AsmParser/LLParser.cpp: In member function 'bool
llvm::LLParser::ParseGlobal(const
2010 Nov 09
1
[LLVMdev] uninitialized value warnings: LLVMParser.cpp
These warnings started appearing recently when building LLVM:
llvm[2]: Compiling LLParser.cpp for Release build
/Volumes/Data/Users/kremenek/llvm/lib/AsmParser/LLParser.cpp: In member function ‘bool llvm::LLParser::ParseBr(llvm::Instruction*&, llvm::LLParser::PerFunctionState&)’:
/Volumes/Data/Users/kremenek/llvm/lib/AsmParser/LLParser.cpp:3195: warning: ‘Op1’ may be used uninitialized in
2008 Mar 24
1
[LLVMdev] AsmParser/Lexer.l error
Hello
With the latest LLVM from Subversion (rev48737 from
http://llvm.org/svn/llvm-project/llvm/trunk) I'm getting
make[2]: Entering directory `/usr/src/Lang/llvm/_Obj/lib/AsmParser'
llvm[2]: Flexing Lexer.l
llvm[2]: Compiling Lexer.cpp for Debug build
/usr/src/Lang/llvm/lib/AsmParser/Lexer.l: In function 'int llvmAsmlex()':
/usr/src/Lang/llvm/lib/AsmParser/Lexer.l:278: error:
2013 Jan 16
1
[LLVMdev] Renaming lib/AsmParser?
Hello,
The recent renamings moved some IR-related files and directories to
more logical places. Is there a plan to rename lib/AsmParser as well?
This directory name is somewhat misleading, because the code in it
parses IR. In fact, nothing mentions AsmParser in the code inside that
dir, except the build files. The name creates a confusion with other
AsmParser citizens of LLVM like
2012 May 09
1
[LLVMdev] Directive parsing for AsmParser
I'm trying to build a standalone assembler for Mips using AsmParser and I'm facing a problem with assembly directives. Mips assembler has following syntax for .set directive
.set reorder
or
.set noreorder
which allow/disallow assembler to change the order of instructions in the block that follows. As the implemented AsmParser requires .set directive to have the following syntax:
2009 Nov 13
2
[LLVMdev] AsmParser is not robust
Hello all,
My partner was just debugging a project that had tried to call a function without arguments in the code but the declaration wasn't declared with a void parameter list. It failed with an assertion that something was trying to ++ past the end of an ilist.
I seem to remember Chris Lattner saying when he made the hand written AsmParser that it wasn't intended to be very robust
2007 Dec 23
1
[LLVMdev] compilaton problem
Hi.
For weeks now I have problems compiling llvm from svn, compilation ends with
llvm[2]: Compiling Lexer.cpp for Release build
/home/borist/builds/llvm/lib/AsmParser/Lexer.l: In function 'int
llvmAsmlex()':
/home/borist/builds/llvm/lib/AsmParser/Lexer.l:278: error: 'PURE' was
not declared in this scope
/home/borist/builds/llvm/lib/AsmParser/Lexer.l:279: error: 'CONST'
2009 Nov 13
0
[LLVMdev] AsmParser is not robust
On Nov 13, 2009, at 10:16 AM, Samuel Crow wrote:
> Hello all,
>
> My partner was just debugging a project that had tried to call a
> function without arguments in the code but the declaration wasn't
> declared with a void parameter list. It failed with an assertion
> that something was trying to ++ past the end of an ilist.
>
> I seem to remember Chris Lattner
2015 Aug 20
2
Problem Compiling AsmParser
Hi all,
I am trying to compile with a minimal TestAsmParser class, but I get the
following error.
----------------
[43/780] Linking CXX executable bin/llvm-mc
FAILED: : && /usr/bin/c++ -fPIC -fvisibility-inlines-hidden -Wall -W
-Wno-unused-parameter -Wwrite-strings -Wcast-qual
-Wno-missing-field-initializers -pedantic -Wno-long-long
-Wno-maybe-uninitialized -Wno-comment -std=c++11
2016 Sep 11
2
[Target] AsmParser Error : key functions missing
Hi All,
I wrote a very crude and simple AsmParser for my backend. llvm-tablegen
also generates asm-matcher .inc file without any error. I have included the
.inc file in my class for AsmParser.
However, while building llvm, in linking stage for LTO, i am getting error
- undefined reference to functions - ComputeAvailableFeatures,
MatchInstructionImpl, MatchRegisterName and
2011 Sep 08
2
[LLVMdev] [LLVM, llvm-mc, AsmParser] Symbol locations.
Hi everybody. I found that there are some problems with symbol location in AsmParser.
1. We need to know where symbol was declared.
2. We need to know where symbol was defined first time.
There are two ways:
1. Add helper table to the parser with additional symbol info. But it takes additional memory consumption.
2. Add user tag (void*) for MCSymbol object. As I understood MCSymbol can live
2007 Dec 15
4
[LLVMdev] fix warning with newer g++ compilers
Newer g++ compilers can emit:
/Volumes/mrs5/net/llvm/llvm/llvm/lib/AsmParser/LLLexer.cpp: In member
function 'int llvm::LLLexer::LexAt()':
/Volumes/mrs5/net/llvm/llvm/llvm/lib/AsmParser/LLLexer.cpp:287:
warning: suggest a space before ';' or explicit braces around empty
body in 'for' statement
/Volumes/mrs5/net/llvm/llvm/llvm/lib/AsmParser/LLLexer.cpp: In member
2011 Sep 08
0
[LLVMdev] [LLVM, llvm-mc, AsmParser] Symbol locations.
Now I see, that its to so trivial as I thought before. There are a lots of parser extensions that creates the symbols. And in each place we need insert add its location info. I also found that MCContext has several create symbols methods, but all these methods uses CreateSymbol private method.
So I see two possible ways here:
1. To aggregate all GetOrCreate-like symbol methods inside the
2013 Dec 19
1
[LLVMdev] [PATCH] MC: handle .cfi_startproc simple
Really sorry I missed this. Just found it looking for something else
in my inbox.
I think we should support this but
* We should still err on other identifiers ".cfi_startport bar" is invalid.
* If I read the gas documentation correctly, the effect of "simple" is
to skip the initial cfi instructions. We should test if that is the
case and implement it too. Accepting and
2015 Oct 23
3
[AMDGPU] AMDGPUAsmParser fails to parse several instructions
Dear Developers,
I compile a OpenCL kernel, FFT, in AMDAPP SDK v2.5 using clang 3.8 + libclc
and assembling the code with lld (The LLVM linker). The assembly code
contains the following assembly codes (and lots of other similar format
assembly) that fails to be parsed by AMDGPUAsmParser. It seems to me that
both are valid instructions after looking at the SI instruction spec.
s_mov_b32 s0,
2008 Sep 19
2
[LLVMdev] Disappearing Machine Basic Blocks (for new instruction)
I have a new instruction that takes 2 labels, and in SelectionDAGISel,
I have it doing "CurMBB->addSuccessor()" for both machine blocks. The
DAG node it creates also takes both blocks as SDOperands.
When I lower to x86, the not-fallthrough block disappears. If I run
llc with --fast, the blocks stay around, so it must be an optimization
pass of some sort that doesn't realize my