search for: assembaling

I am trying to understand the hello word assember example. This is my version: %str1 = internal constant [13 x sbyte] c"Hello World\0a\00" declare int %printf(sbyte*, ...) implementation ; Functions: int %main() { %str2 = getelementptr [13 x sbyte]* %str1, long 0, long 0 call int(sbyte*, ...) *%printf(sbyte* %str2) ret int 0 } Why is getelementptr being given two "long

Hi, I recently updated to current llvm svn and fixed-up the minor compiler errors I encountered. However, at run-time even my Hello world programs crash with a segmentation fault. A concrete program that crashes on my Linux x86_64 Fedora box is: declare void @__ot_runtime_print_int(i8*, i32) define void @main() { entry: call void @__ot_runtime_print_int(i8* null, i32 12) br label %return

Hi, I must say I also was in need of this document but never knew it existed. It seems to be linked from the faq page only. I only read that the first day I came to LLVM. Maybe linking it from the GetElementPtr instruction in LangRef.html would make sense. cheers Eric On Nov 12, 2006, at 8:47 PM, Reid Spencer wrote: > Ram, > > Please read and understand the GetElementPtr FAQ

Ram, Please read and understand the GetElementPtr FAQ available here: http://llvm.org/docs/GetElementPtr.html That will help you understand how it works. We wrote that document specifically because this question comes up all the time. Reid. On Sun, 2006-11-12 at 11:13 -0800, Ram Bhamidipaty wrote: > I am trying to understand the hello word assember example. This is > my version: >

Hi all, I'm compiling LLCM IR code like this on x86-64: define linkonce ccc <16 x float> @vector_add_float(<16 x float> %a.78, <16 x float> %a.79) align 8 { entry: %result.80 = fadd <16 x float> %a.78, %a.79 ret <18 x float> %result.80 } This works really well when the vector length (16 in the above) is an integer multiple of the SSE vector

On Mon, 2006-11-13 at 01:10 -0800, Chris Lattner wrote: > On Mon, 13 Nov 2006, Eric van Riet Paap wrote: > > I must say I also was in need of this document but never knew it > > existed. It seems to be linked from the faq page only. I only read > > that the first day I came to LLVM. Maybe linking it from the > > GetElementPtr instruction in LangRef.html would make sense.

Ram: Let me explain and hopefully Reid or Chris will correct if I have it wrong. The first 0 is the index into a possible array of sbyte[13] arrays that this pointer points to. I expect GetElementPtr works this way is to keep down the proliferation of arrays of arrays in the type table. So you are pointing at the zeroth, and in this case only, array of sbyte[13]. The next 0 actually

On Mon, 13 Nov 2006, Eric van Riet Paap wrote: > I must say I also was in need of this document but never knew it > existed. It seems to be linked from the faq page only. I only read > that the first day I came to LLVM. Maybe linking it from the > GetElementPtr instruction in LangRef.html would make sense. That makes a tremendous amount of sense to me! -Chris > On Nov 12, 2006,

Are you running in the JIT? If not, what assembler are you using? This looks like an issue with encoding the relative PC distance between the call site and the call entry. Notice that the call site is at a very high address (0x7fffff....) while the target is very low. x86_64 can't encode a full 64-bit immediate offset in the call instruction, so depending on how you are generating this code

On Nov 13, 2006, at 9:01 AM, Reid Spencer wrote: > On Mon, 2006-11-13 at 01:10 -0800, Chris Lattner wrote: >> On Mon, 13 Nov 2006, Eric van Riet Paap wrote: >>> I must say I also was in need of this document but never knew it >>> existed. It seems to be linked from the faq page only. I only read >>> that the first day I came to LLVM. Maybe linking it from the

Hi Erik, this is a bug, please open a bugreport. The LLVM type legalizer has a bunch of code to handle this (vector widening), but unfortunately the argument lowering code seems to have scalarized the function arguments before getting to the type legalizer. Compare with the code produced for the following: define void @vector_add_float(<18 x float> *%rp, <18 x float> *%a.78p,

Hello R-help List I am writing some R scripts to create graphs of water quality trends that will be called by a web service running R. The axis titles will need to change as the input data (ie. water quality variable) changes according to a user's choice made via a web page. The way I am currently passing call-specific parameters to the R script is via a text file created on the fly by the

Dear all, The background: as I didn't find a manual specifically directed towards debugging R code on a novice and intermediate level, I decided to write a student manual myself. I have some basic examples of errors (the classical interpunction and writing mistakes), but have the feeling that I miss quite some of the frequently occuring mistakes and messages. Therefore I'm looking around

Hi JM, Thanks for the earlier replies. I have tested it with quality 1,2&3 the result is not much different. Also I must tell you that I am using the armbe-linux-gcc compiler which does not suppoort arm5e-asm optimisations. I get lots of assember related errors. Is there any alternative? Will moving on to a board supported by arm-linux-gcc compiler ,to enable arm5e optimisation, help?

Hi, Thanks for pointing direction. As far, as I understand by reversing, logic, that I want to overwrite is digged into: lib/MC/MCSectionELF.cpp MCSectionELF::PrintSwitchToSection if (ShouldOmitSectionDirective(SectionName, MAI)) { OS << '\t' << getSectionName() << '\n'; return; } // otherwise print ".section" directive and then section

Re-post, as I think my last post didn't get through. Sorry, if somebody got it twice now Hi I run in the following make tests error and didn't find any solution to this. - This is a test on the localhost, so I guess, there is no man in the middle attack (hosts file is setup correctly, localhost points to 127.0.0.1) - I don't want to use protocol 1 anyway, so how can I skip

Here comes a not-so-nice one: Sorry to be blunt, but I think the current reality is that one's effectiveness in scientific computing is not likely to be high if s/he can't read C for Fortran code. The mode of development for new methods, I believe, should be: - Write it in R (or S-PLUS or Matlab or ...) because one can usually do that quite quickly. - Check and make sure the code

Hi, I'm new to Theora and would like to propose several performance optimization using advanced instructions in x86 CPUs (SSE2-SSE4.2). There are several source files in \x86 and \x86_vc which developed using inline assembler. However this cause several maintenance problems: 1) Need to sync gcc & msvc versions 2) Only 32bit environment is supported 3) No support for newer than MMX

This version over last version: (1) Gets rid of the no_paravirt.h header and leaves native ops in place (with some reshuffling to keep then under one #ifdef). (2) Fixes the "X crashes with CONFIG_PARAVIRT=y" bug. (3) Puts __ex_table entry in paravirt iret. Another followup patch implements binary patching... Rusty. === Create a paravirt.h header for all the critical operations which

This version over last version: (1) Gets rid of the no_paravirt.h header and leaves native ops in place (with some reshuffling to keep then under one #ifdef). (2) Fixes the "X crashes with CONFIG_PARAVIRT=y" bug. (3) Puts __ex_table entry in paravirt iret. Another followup patch implements binary patching... Rusty. === Create a paravirt.h header for all the critical operations which