search for: bharadwajy

Hi, Is there some place I can get instructions to load, build and debug LLVM and/or Clang using XCode on Mac OSX? Sorry if this is an FAQ - my (possibly quick) search did not yield an answer. Thanks, Bharadwaj

On Mon, Sep 5, 2011 at 6:16 PM, S. Bharadwaj Yadavalli <bharadwajy at gmail.com> wrote: > Hi, > > Is there some place I can get instructions to load, build and debug > LLVM and/or Clang using XCode on Mac OSX? > > Sorry if this is an FAQ - my (possibly quick) search did not yield an answer. You can generate an XCode project using CMake. See...

On Sun, Sep 4, 2011 at 8:40 PM, S. Bharadwaj Yadavalli <bharadwajy at gmail.com> wrote: > Hi, > > I built LLVM + Clang on Mac OS X and ran make check. I get the > following result summary: > > Failing Tests (11): >    LLVM :: LLVMC/C++/dash-x.cpp >    LLVM :: LLVMC/C++/hello.cpp >    LLVM :: LLVMC/C++/just-compile.cpp >    LLVM ::...

Hi, I built LLVM + Clang on Mac OS X and ran make check. I get the following result summary: Failing Tests (11): LLVM :: LLVMC/C++/dash-x.cpp LLVM :: LLVMC/C++/hello.cpp LLVM :: LLVMC/C++/just-compile.cpp LLVM :: LLVMC/C++/together.cpp LLVM :: LLVMC/C++/unknown_suffix.unk LLVM :: LLVMC/C/hello.c LLVM :: LLVMC/C/opt-test.c LLVM :: LLVMC/C/sink.c LLVM ::

...since those aren't moves. For X86 you can try using "X86II::hasImm(MI.getDesc().TSFlags)" that's what the encoder uses to determine if there's an immediate to encode at the end of the instruction encoding. ~Craig On Fri, Feb 9, 2018 at 1:13 PM, S. Bharadwaj Yadavalli <bharadwajy at gmail.com > wrote: > I am trying to categorize the machine instructions based on associated > static (i.e., as encoded in .td file) machine description and the > corresponding APIs. > I would like to perform appropriate actions based on the kind of > instruction in a tool that...

I am trying to categorize the machine instructions based on associated static (i.e., as encoded in .td file) machine description and the corresponding APIs. I would like to perform appropriate actions based on the kind of instruction in a tool that I am working on. For example, I'd like to distinguish between memop instructions involving immediate vs register. While it appears that I would be

I would like to generate the tags for LLVM sources to be used by emacs. I noticed that there is a tags target that can be specified to make to generate the tags file. It appears that the rules for this target are generated only with the specification of --with-tags option to configure script. However, I get the following errors respectively when I specify --with-tags or --with-tags=TAGS option to

On Sep 4, 2011, at 8:50 PM, Eli Friedman wrote: > On Sun, Sep 4, 2011 at 8:40 PM, S. Bharadwaj Yadavalli > <bharadwajy at gmail.com> wrote: >> Hi, >> >> I built LLVM + Clang on Mac OS X and ran make check. I get the >> following result summary: >> >> Failing Tests (11): >> LLVM :: LLVMC/C++/dash-x.cpp >> LLVM :: LLVMC/C++/hello.cpp >> LLVM :: LLVMC...

Hi, I notice that the following recent addition X86::CondCode X86::getCondFromBranch(const MachineInstr &MI) { switch (MI.getOpcode()) { default: return X86::COND_INVALID; case X86::JCC_1: return static_cast<X86::CondCode>( MI.getOperand(MI.getDesc().getNumOperands() - 1).getImm()); } } returns an invalid condition for JCC_2 and JCC_4 conditional opcodes. What is

Hi , Currently GobalIsel like FastIsel designed to use fallback to DAGIsel in case of failure. You can use -global-isel-abort=2 option. llc -global-isel -pass-remarks-missed="gisel-*" -global-isel-abort=2 simple_foo.ll Regards, Igor From: S. Bharadwaj Yadavalli [mailto:bharadwajy at gmail.com] Sent: Thursday, November 09, 2017 03:36 To: Aditya Nandakumar <proaditya at gmail.com> Cc: Craig Topper <craig.topper at gmail.com>; llvm-dev <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org>; Breger, Igor <igor.breger at intel.com> Subject: Re: [llvm-dev] [GlobalISel] [X86] unable...

I believe if you pass(iirc) -pass-remarks-missed=“gisel-*”, it’ll print the instruction it failed to legalize. Sent from my iPhone > On Oct 11, 2017, at 6:44 PM, S. Bharadwaj Yadavalli via llvm-dev <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: > > Thanks for your quick reply. > > Here its is: > > =========== > > ; ModuleID = 'simple_foo.c' > source_filename

Hi, Sorry for the newbie question. I downloaded llvm and tried out the simple "Hello, World" program but got the following error. What am I missing? I am running RHAS 3 Update 4 with GCC 3.2.3. Thanks, Bharadwaj $ ./hello lli: /home/proj/skokomish/syadaval/ia32/Sandbox/llvm/lib/Target/X86/X86CodeEmitter.cpp:208: unsigned char ModRMByte(unsigned int, unsigned int, unsigned int):

I get the following error during compilation using the LLVM cross-compiler (x86_64->arm). error: nested functions are disabled, use -fnested-functions to re-enable With -fnested-functions switch, I get the following error: <llvm-src-dir>/llvm/lib/Target/ARM/ARMISelLowering.cpp:1439: virtual llvm::SDValue llvm::ARMTargetLowering::LowerOperation(llvm::SDValue, llvm::SelectionDAG&):

I am trying to build a x86_64 to ARM cross compiler. I configured, built and installed LLVM as follows: $ ../../../src/llvm/configure --with-llvmgccdir=<llvm-root>/install/x86_64-arm/llvm-gcc-4.2 --enable-optimized --enable-jit --prefix=<llvm-root>/install/x86_64-arm/llvm --target=arm-unknown-linux-gnueabi $ make $ make install Then I configured gcc front end as follows: $

I get the following assertion failure during my attempt to build an x86_64->ARM cross compiler. <llvm-build>/./gcc/xgcc -B<llvm-build>/./gcc/ -B<llvm-install>/arm-none-linux-gnueabi/bin/ -B<llvm-install>/arm-none-linux-gnueabi/lib/ -isystem <llvm-install>/arm-none-linux-gnueabi/include -isystem <llvm-install>/arm-none-linux-gnueabi/sys-include -O2 -O2 -g

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

Hi Duncan, Thanks for your reply. I did try the method suggested by you. I got a foo.bc with -emit-llvm switch. llc on foo.bc gets me the same assertion failure, as you pointed out. Then I ran bugpoint to generate bugpoint-reduced-simplified.bc and bugpoint-reduced-function.bc. My previous experience is that if I compile either if them, I would get the same failure as I did with foo.bc. That is