search for: backpatched

...getPointerToFunction always returns the address of the stub, so any indirect calls to the function hit the stub. The stub will attempt to backpatch the callsite, and should fail if it is a) outside the JIT or b) an indirect call. Indirect calls will always go through the stub. Direct calls can be backpatched. Alternatively, everything would go through the stub. Finally, you have to be careful about the memory model of the architecture you're dealing with if you care about threads. On x86, if you can align the operand of the call instruction, you can do an atomic update. You will also have to ma...

...always returns the address of the stub, so any > indirect calls to the function hit the stub. The stub will attempt to > backpatch the callsite, and should fail if it is a) outside the JIT or > b) an indirect call. Indirect calls will always go through the stub. > Direct calls can be backpatched. > > Alternatively, everything would go through the stub. > > Finally, you have to be careful about the memory model of the > architecture you're dealing with if you care about threads. On x86, > if you can align the operand of the call instruction, you can do an > atomi...

...address of the stub, so any > > indirect calls to the function hit the stub. The stub will attempt to > > backpatch the callsite, and should fail if it is a) outside the JIT or > > b) an indirect call. Indirect calls will always go through the stub. > > Direct calls can be backpatched. > > > > Alternatively, everything would go through the stub. > > > > Finally, you have to be careful about the memory model of the > > architecture you're dealing with if you care about threads. On x86, > > if you can align the operand of the call instructi...

On Apr 3, 2011, at 12:11 PM, Eric Christopher wrote: > <snip conversation about call patching> It seems to me that there's a general feature here that LLVM is lacking, that would be useful in a number of JIT-compilation contexts, namely the ability to mark certain instructions (direct calls, perhaps branches too) as back-patchable. The thing that stands out to me is that

> > > Then we would always have the location of the br B instruction in A, as it is pushed onto the stack or saved in link register when A calls B. > Right, unless you wanted to go with direct calls in the JIT. I don't know that inspecting a running program's stack for return values while compiling on a separate thread is sane :) That said, the adaptive compilation

On Thu, Mar 31, 2011 at 11:07 PM, Eric Christopher <echristo at apple.com>wrote: > > > > > > No we will always have control over where the parent calls the functions > that we are recompiling. As explained in the example below > > > > Original Code > > > > Binary for A: Binary for B: > > > > ... ...

All, I have a CentOS 4 system I need to update OpenSSH on. Most of my experience has been on slackware and I am new to using yum and packages. I ran yum and it tells me that my current installed version is 3.9 patch level 1. It also said that there are no updates for it. I did a google for it but every link I saw that seemed to point to info about an rpm for 4.3 came up not found. Is there a

Hi all, I updated the patches to remove the native object wrapper format. As suggested we will work on getting the ThinLTO framework in place using bitcode first, and then work on adding the native object support. As noted in this RFC and in the associated patch D11722, for now I have empty ThinLTO blocks with no records, since I wanted to get feedback on the overall block design first. The RFC

On Apr 3, 2011, at 12:01 PM, Xin Tong Utoronto wrote: > Another way to do the patching is to first atomically inserted a self-loop jump -2 atomically (jump -2 takes 2 bytes and 2 bytes writing is atomic on x86 ) into the old branch address on x86 such that it stops all threads reaching this point. copy in the new compiled function address. and then re-patch the jump -2 with the correct

Hello all, For the past couple of weeks I have been spending some time debugging a couple of issues I was having with Mongrel when I put load on it. I have seen two distinct issues: 1. Mongrel stopped responding as if in an endless loop. 2. Mongrel crashed when severely loaded. I believe to have resolved these two issues and have attached patches which shows the resolution (simple as it is).

...ISO8859-1 The problem is easy to pinpoint (a network sniffer helped me a little there, and then a nice debugger). At one point in processing input commands, smbclient >= 2.2.1 thinks it has a DOS-translated name, but this is wrong. And thus accented characters are improperly translated. I backpatched to Samba 2.2.0, since several people told me they did not have this kind of problem. And it's true :-) The 'core' of my grudge seems to lie in the new clistr_push function, which does not exist in release 2.2.0. A 'cd directory' command is thus processed by cli_chkpath, which...

Hi all, Using R a as a real-time application called by Php for a website, I would like to run one R process only, which would manage user connections. For the time each user who asks for an analysis causes a new R process to start, which is not suitable in prevision of many users. R needs about 30 seconds to run the script which makes the analysis. The problem is that this waiting time is n

On Tue, Apr 4, 2017 at 12:36 PM, Duncan P. N. Exon Smith < dexonsmith at apple.com> wrote: > > On 2017-Apr-04, at 12:12, Peter Collingbourne <peter at pcc.me.uk> wrote: > > On Mon, Apr 3, 2017 at 8:13 PM, Mehdi Amini <mehdi.amini at apple.com> wrote: > >> >> On Apr 3, 2017, at 7:08 PM, Peter Collingbourne <peter at pcc.me.uk> wrote: >>

Hi All, In the interests of improving visibility into ORC JIT development I'm going to try writing weekly status updates for the community. I hope they will provide insight into the design and state of development of LLVM's JIT APIs, as well as serving as a convenient space for discussions among LLVM's large and growing community of JIT API users. The length and detail will vary

Hi Andres, I also want to highlight the necessity of some form of C API, that others > already have. > <snip> > It's fine if the set of "somewhat stable" C APIs doesn't provide all the > possible features, though. Ok. This got me thinking about what a simple LLJIT API should look like. I have posted a sketch of a possible API on http://llvm.org/PR31103 . I

sounds like a good idea to me. but one of the current issues of back-patching in the LLVM is that the back-patching is not done atomically on some of the architectures, i.e. Intel x86. and this makes LLVM JIT not thread-safe in lazy compilation mode. what we need to make sure is that the "updating the resolution for a given symbol" you mentioned is done in an atomic fashion. also, how