search for: built_in_appli

Displaying 5 results from an estimated 5 matches for "built_in_appli".

Did you mean: built_in_apply
2008 Feb 15
0
[LLVMdev] llvm.atomic.barrier implementation
On 2/15/08, Andrew Lenharth <andrewl at lenharth.org> wrote: > I'll take a hack at the front end support for > __sync_synchronize after this goes in. This is the gcc side of the patch. Index: gcc/llvm-convert.cpp =================================================================== --- gcc/llvm-convert.cpp (revision 46956) +++ gcc/llvm-convert.cpp (working copy) @@
2008 Feb 15
6
[LLVMdev] llvm.atomic.barrier implementation
Attached is the target independent llvm.atomic.barrier support, as well as alpha and x86 (sse2) support. This matches Chandler's definitions, and the LangRef patch will just restore that. Non-sse2 barrier will be needed, I think it is "lock; mov %esp, %esp", but I'm not sure. Any objections? I'll take a hack at the front end support for __sync_synchronize after this
2011 Jun 18
0
[LLVMdev] Make dragonegg work with gcc-4.6
Hi, Duncan I saw you started to port dragonegg to gcc 4.6, which is a good news. And I am also trying to do that. The attachment get src/Convert.cpp to compile against gcc-4.6. Now I get a error while compiling dragonegg, --- Compiling Debug.cpp /tmp/chenwj/dragonegg/src/Debug.cpp: In member function 'llvm::DIType llvm::DebugInfo::createArrayType(tree_node*)':
2008 Feb 15
2
[LLVMdev] llvm.atomic.barrier implementation
On Feb 15, 2008, at 2:29 PM, Andrew Lenharth wrote: > On 2/15/08, Andrew Lenharth <andrewl at lenharth.org> wrote: >> I'll take a hack at the front end support for >> __sync_synchronize after this goes in. > > This is the gcc side of the patch. Thanks for tackling this Andrew. Please prepare a patch for LangRef.html that explains what this thing does :). What
2008 Feb 15
3
[LLVMdev] llvm.atomic.barrier implementation
On Feb 15, 2008, at 2:29 PM, Andrew Lenharth wrote: > On 2/15/08, Andrew Lenharth <andrewl at lenharth.org> wrote: >> I'll take a hack at the front end support for >> __sync_synchronize after this goes in. > > This is the gcc side of the patch. GCC 4.2 compiles this to a no-op on x86: void foo() { __sync_synchronize(); } Are you seeing different behavior?