search for: babslachem

Hi all, I'm new to this list and I would like to know who is involved in llc ARM backend maintenance/evolution. -- Seb -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/attachments/20111005/5abc7f0d/attachment.html>

You can compile an empty C source code with clang -S -emit-llvm and copy the data layout from there. 2011/10/27 Seb <babslachem at gmail.com> > Hi all, > > Can someone give me advice on what should be a good definition of target > datalayout for an ARM cortex-A9 + neon target and x86 32-bit ? > Shall I use a different definition for a cortex-A9 without neon ? > Thanks for your advices > Best Regards...

Hi all, Can someone give me advice on what should be a good definition of target datalayout for an ARM cortex-A9 + neon target and x86 32-bit ? Shall I use a different definition for a cortex-A9 without neon ? Thanks for your advices Best Regards Seb -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL:

...> > You can’t expect debug information for an optimised build to fully track > that of the source because by definition the source is being modified to > optimise.**** > > ** ** > > Cheers,**** > > ** ** > > James**** > > ** ** > > *From:* Seb [mailto:babslachem at gmail.com] > *Sent:* 07 March 2012 13:37 > *To:* James Molloy > *Cc:* llvmdev at cs.uiuc.edu > *Subject:* Re: [LLVMdev] Problem with x86 32-bit debug information ?**** > > ** ** > > Hi James, > > clang is able to generate correct debug informations for 64-bit target...

...ay to build clang so that it support cross-compilation for ARM/x86-32 ? Best Regards Seb 2011/10/27 Carl-Philip Hänsch <cphaensch at googlemail.com> > You can compile an empty C source code with clang -S -emit-llvm and copy > the data layout from there. > > 2011/10/27 Seb <babslachem at gmail.com> > >> Hi all, >> >> Can someone give me advice on what should be a good definition of target >> datalayout for an ARM cortex-A9 + neon target and x86 32-bit ? >> Shall I use a different definition for a cortex-A9 without neon ? >> Thanks for yo...

On Wed, Mar 7, 2012 at 6:50 AM, Seb <babslachem at gmail.com> wrote: > Hi James, > > I fully agree with you and understand your statement about -O2. > > Now some questions for you: > Did you try to reproduce experiments described in my previous e-mail ? > Did you look at debug informations generated for 'n' parame...

On Mar 6, 2012, at 5:31 AM, Seb <babslachem at gmail.com> wrote: > Hi all, > > Anyone have ideas/info on this topic ? > Thanks > Seb > > 2012/3/2 Seb <babslachem at gmail.com> > Hi all, > > I'm using my own front-end to generate following code .ll file targeting x86 32-bit: > > ; ModuleID...

Hi all, Anyone have ideas/info on this topic ? Thanks Seb 2012/3/2 Seb <babslachem at gmail.com> > Hi all, > > I'm using my own front-end to generate following code .ll file targeting > x86 32-bit: > > ; ModuleID = 'check.c' > target datalayout = > "e-p:32:32:32-i1:8:8-i8:8:8-i16:16:16-i32:32:32-i64:32:64-f32:32:32-f64:32:64-v64:64:64-...

...anks for the advice. Since I'm using LLVM 2.9 style of debug information. Will this code benefit from those improvement or should I generate LLVM 3.0 style of debug information ? Best Regards Seb 2012/3/6 Jim Grosbach <grosbach at apple.com> > > On Mar 6, 2012, at 5:31 AM, Seb <babslachem at gmail.com> wrote: > > Hi all, > > Anyone have ideas/info on this topic ? > Thanks > Seb > > 2012/3/2 Seb <babslachem at gmail.com> > >> Hi all, >> >> I'm using my own front-end to generate following code .ll file targeting >> x86 32...

...gt; -----Original Message----- > From: Paul Robinson [mailto:pogo.work at gmail.com] > Sent: 08 March 2012 23:00 > To: Seb > Cc: llvmdev at cs.uiuc.edu; James Molloy > Subject: Re: [LLVMdev] Problem with x86 32-bit debug information ? > > On Wed, Mar 7, 2012 at 6:50 AM, Seb <babslachem at gmail.com> wrote: > > Hi James, > > > > I fully agree with you and understand your statement about -O2. > > > > Now some questions for you: > > Did you try to reproduce experiments described in my previous e-mail ? > > Did you look at debug informatio...

...to it. We at ARM also commit to the back end. In general any questions you would ask a maintainer you should just post to the list and people will reply. Cheers, James ________________________________________ From: llvmdev-bounces at cs.uiuc.edu [llvmdev-bounces at cs.uiuc.edu] On Behalf Of Seb [babslachem at gmail.com] Sent: 05 October 2011 17:16 To: llvmdev at cs.uiuc.edu Subject: [LLVMdev] LLC ARM Backend maintainer Hi all, I'm new to this list and I would like to know who is involved in llc ARM backend maintenance/evolution. -- Seb -- IMPORTANT NOTICE: The contents of this email and any a...

Hi all, Is there a way to disable use of specific optimization pass from opt at command line level ? I would like to do something like: opt -O2 -no-loop-idiom ... And I want to this to disable all invocations of loop-idom optimization, but keep all other -O2 opts. Thanks for your help Best Regards Sbb -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL:

Hi all, Following command was working for me before: svn co http://llvm.org/svn/llvm-project/llvm/trunk llvm Now it fails as follows: svn: Server sent unexpected return value (500 Internal Server Error) in response to OPTIONS request for 'http://llvm.org/svn/llvm-project/llvm/trunk ' Any idea ? Best Regards Seb -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed...

Hi all, I'm using my own front-end to generate following code .ll file targeting x86 32-bit: ; ModuleID = 'check.c' target datalayout = "e-p:32:32:32-i1:8:8-i8:8:8-i16:16:16-i32:32:32-i64:32:64-f32:32:32-f64:32:64-v64:64:64-v128:128:128-a0:0:64-f80:32:32-n8:16:32" target triple = "i386-pc-linux-gnu" @.str581 = internal constant [52 x i8] c"---- test number %d

Hi James, clang is able to generate correct debug informations for 64-bit target at -O2. My feeling, given some other experiments I've done, is that debug information generated for x86 32-bit might be broken for parameters as long as they are not 'homed' in the code (local copy to an automatic variable). It seems that when llvm.declare is turned into a llvm.value for parameter there

Hi Devang, Not only "vtable ptr" is a problem, for this field it seems that CLANG emits a NULL metadata node which is translated into 'i32 0'. The other problem is for 'isArtificial' field with is described as being of type i1 and CLANG emits i32. Looking at sources, it seems that it should be a i32 flag field. Hope this helps, Best Regards Seb 2011/12/15 Devang

2011/12/9 Joerg Sonnenberger <joerg at britannica.bec.de> > On Fri, Dec 09, 2011 at 10:03:37AM +0100, Seb wrote: > > I think my explanation is not clear, my front-end did NOTt generate > > 'llvm.memcpy' it generate LL code that after use of LLVM 'opt' get > > transformed by 'loop-idom' pass into an 'llvm.memcpy' for an overlapping >

Hi Duncan, What do you mean by "a data layout string in your module" ? Best Regards Seb 2011/10/18 Duncan Sands <baldrick at free.fr> > Hi Seb, > > > I'm writting following LLVM assembly: > > > > ; ModuleID = 'structaccess.ll' > > > > not having a data layout string in your module disables many optimizations. > > Ciao,

Hi all, I was wondering if there is a way to check that metadata emitted in an LLVM file are corrects with respect to debug informations. My problem is that I emit 'metadata' in an .ll file and then using 'llc' there is no debug information emitted in final assembly. For now I limit metadata to routines/subprogram/file/block descriptors, is this the problem ? Thanks for your help

Hi Devang, Thanks for the answer, I eventually found that in DW_TAG_compile_unit metadata, if field for 'main' compile unit is set to false then no debug info is generated. Can someone explain what is the meaning of this field ? You wrote: "Right now there is no such check. In fact, 'llc' is trained to silently ignore malformed debug information, because 'opt' is