search for: denisov

After the extended discussion I think it's in a pretty good shape now: https://reviews.llvm.org/D61550 Any further comments? > On 4. May 2019, at 11:32, Alex Denisov <1101.debian at gmail.com> wrote: > > The final draft is now published and awaiting your comments or approval :) > > https://reviews.llvm.org/D61550 > >> On 15. Apr 2019, at 16:01, Alex Denisov <1101.debian at gmail.com> wrote: >> >> Hi folks, >&g...

Hi folks, I want to update the Release Notes for the release/9.x, but seems like 'git llvm push' only supports commits to the master/trunk. What's the current process for such patches? Thanks, Alex. -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 488 bytes Desc: Message signed with OpenPGP URL:

...ue about this, but I won’t :) > Just don't use atexit. The problem is that I run third-party programs. I cannot control them. > On 20. Nov 2017, at 01:04, Joerg Sonnenberger via llvm-dev <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: > > On Mon, Nov 20, 2017 at 12:22:49AM +0100, Alex Denisov via llvm-dev wrote: >> JIT allocates and maps some memory for the execution. Some function X at address 0xdeadbeef is part of this memory. >> JIT calls a code that passes the X to atexit. >> JIT deallocates and unmaps the memory used for execution (either via objectLayer.removeObj...

...end I did it the same way OrcMCJITReplacement does it. Constructors and destructors are called and, thanks to LocalCXXRuntimeOverrides, the program does not crash on exit! But it does seem like there should be a simpler way; the learning curve is steep... Geoff On Thu, 21 Jun 2018 at 12:28, Alex Denisov <1101.debian at gmail.com> wrote: > Now I see, thanks. > > There is no need to do it exactly the same way as OrcMCJITReplacement does. > What you need is to get list of constructors and destructors functions > from a module. You can just reuse this code snippet in your code: &...

...t Runtime Compiled C++ http://cppcast.com/2016/05/doug-binks/ Am 21.11.17 um 14:20 schrieb Nikodemus Siivola via llvm-dev: > Transform the atexit into equivalent code you can control, run it > before the destructors of the JIT engine run? > > > On Tue, Nov 21, 2017 at 12:13 PM, Alex Denisov via llvm-dev > <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org <mailto:llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org>> wrote: > > > It's not the job of the Orc engine. > > I could argue about this, but I won’t :) > > > Just don't use atexit. > > The problem is that I r...

...n a map. Later, to execute them, it uses runViaLayer(), which looks for those symbol names in the given JIT layer. Could one not simply execute the constructors straight away, rather than naming them and looking them up by name later, if there is only one module? On Wed, 20 Jun 2018 at 23:08, Alex Denisov <1101.debian at gmail.com> wrote: > Hi Geoff, > > As far as I know there is no "simple" way to do that. > > > I would prefer to avoid having to invent secret names for constructors, > play with their linkage and visibility, and generally get involved in > th...

Hi folks, At EuroLLVM we had a round table for organizers of LLVM Socials around the globe. After the discussion we decided to get some sort of guidelines for those who want to organize the meetup in their city, but have any questions and don't know where to start. Currently, I am creating the very first draft. Once it's in a good shape I will send it to the phabricator. I am looking

On 31 May 2018 at 08:41, Alex Denisov via llvm-dev <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: > I understand the linking problem. What I do not understand is how to debug the difference between two versions of compilers. > This what I do (briefly): > > clang++-4 foobar.cpp -lLLVM -l/opt/llvm-3.9/lib > > clang++-5 fooba...

> On Nov 15, 2019, at 1:52 AM, Alex Denisov <1101.debian at gmail.com> wrote: > >> I think I can just get the patch and remove the `llvm` on top of the paths, but that’s not a scalable approach. > > IIRC, the -p option of 'patch' is exactly for doing this. Would that simplify your use-case? > Yes, for a si...

.../berlin-compiler-meetup -- https://about.me/stefan.graenitz Am 13.07.16 um 23:00 schrieb Piotr Padlewski via llvm-dev: > Hi Alex, > I don't know how many llvm folks are there in Berlin, but I know there > are some in Munich. > > Piotr > > 2016-07-13 13:52 GMT-07:00 Alex Denisov via llvm-dev > <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org <mailto:llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org>>: > > Hello everyone, > > My name is Alex, I'm hobbyist compiler hacker who lives in Berlin, > Germany now. > > I'm thinking about organising "LLVM Social&...

Thank you Alex, I went and implemented a solution along those lines. It works well. It may be worth mentioning static constructors in the Kaleidoscope tutorial. Cheers, Daniele ________________________________________ From: Alex Denisov [1101.debian at gmail.com] Sent: 15 March 2019 08:07 To: Daniele Vettorel Cc: llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org Subject: Re: [llvm-dev] Static constructors with ORC JIT? Hi Daniele, The easiest way is to collect the constructors from the modules and then execute them manually as you would with any other...

...tting it to work in practice depends on a few more details. To Keep it short: * Linux: works out of the box * macOS: possible, but cumbersome (the example is not up-to-date here) * Windows: I lost hope (haven't looked at it for a long time though) Best Stefan Am 13.07.18 um 21:00 schrieb Alex Denisov: > cc'ing Stefan Gränitz, he had some progress on this topic. > >> On 13. Jul 2018, at 18:39, Geoff Levner via llvm-dev <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: >> >> Greetings, LLVM wizards. >> >> I was just wondering if any progress has been made on this i...

...other one does not. I'm trying to understand whether I had this problem all the time but clang-4 could not see it, or there is no problem but clang-5 does something wrong. > On 30. May 2018, at 23:59, Tom Stellard <tstellar at redhat.com> wrote: > > On 05/30/2018 02:39 PM, Alex Denisov via llvm-dev wrote: >> Hello everyone, >> >> I observe a weird behavior switching from clang-4 to clang-5 (and any higher version). >> I compile an executable that depends on LLVM. Everything works fine with clang-4, but when I run the executable compiled with clang-5 I see...

Hi folks, I’m trying to port some code built on top of LLVM/Clang to Windows, however I just discovered that the precompiled versions from releases.llvm.org are missing all the libLLVM* and libclang* dlls. Also, some tools (e.g. opt) are missing on Windows as well. I’m curious whether it’s a technical limitation (i.e. certain things don’t work on Windows), or something else? For the others out

...ot; meetups in Berlin, however I don't really know how many people are here, and how many of them are interested in getting in touch. If you want to participate or have any questions - feel free to answer to this thread, or to send me a private email. So, let's get the ball rolling. -- AlexDenisov Software Engineer, http://lowlevelbits.org -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 496 bytes Desc: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/attachments...

...;rewrite-map-file' registered more than once! LLVM ERROR: inconsistency in registered CommandLine options I want to debug the problem, but don't even know where to start. I am happy to provide more info if anyone wants to participate. I would appreciate any hints. Thank you. Alex. -- AlexDenisov Software Engineer, https://lowlevelbits.org -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 488 bytes Desc: Message signed with OpenPGP URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/attachments/20180530/fcbb...

I had tried this in https://reviews.llvm.org/D8815, but we've since switched to a home grown TLS implementation, so I currently don't have a need for this. On Thu, Aug 18, 2016 at 12:17 AM, Alex Denisov via llvm-dev < llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: > /cc Lang Hames > > > On 17 Aug 2016, at 19:27, Antoine Pitrou via llvm-dev < > llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: > > > > > > Hello, > > > > Am I right in thinking that MCJIT doesn't su...

...mplementation of these instrumentation hooks on GitHub called 'eTrace' that may guide you, though I can't recall the link. > > All the best, > > MartinO > > -----Original Message----- > From: llvm-dev [mailto:llvm-dev-bounces at lists.llvm.org] On Behalf Of Alex Denisov via llvm-dev > Sent: Thursday, July 13, 2017 8:57 AM > To: llvm-dev <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> > Subject: [llvm-dev] How to add custom instrumentation? > > Hi everyone, > > I run some functions using ORC JIT, now I need to add custom instrumentation. > I want to ad...

...cppcast.com/2016/05/doug-binks/ > > Am 21.11.17 um 14:20 schrieb Nikodemus Siivola via llvm-dev: >> Transform the atexit into equivalent code you can control, run it >> before the destructors of the JIT engine run? >> >> >> On Tue, Nov 21, 2017 at 12:13 PM, Alex Denisov via llvm-dev >> <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org <mailto:llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org>> wrote: >> >> > It's not the job of the Orc engine. >> >> I could argue about this, but I won’t :) >> >> > Just don't use atexit. >>...

Hi everyone, I’m working with the LLVM C API now. I see that several functions are deprecated, however the only notion is in comments around the function. Is there any specific reason why __attribute__((deprecated)) is omitted? Will it make sense to send a patch with such additions? -- AlexDenisov Software Engineer, http://lowlevelbits.org -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 496 bytes Desc: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/attachments...