search for: forceinterpret

...omatic enumeration of loaded modules, and the subsequent searching for undefined symbols (using SearchForAddressOfSymbol). I propose adding an extra parameter to the function definition, defaulting to true. static ExecutionEngine *create(ModuleProvider *MP, bool ForceInterpreter = false, std::string *ErrorStr = 0, bool Fast = false, bool EnumModules = true); And corresponding change to the function. ExecutionEngine *ExecutionEngine::create(ModuleProvider *MP,...

On Jul 22, 2009, at 5:23 PM, Chris Lattner wrote: > > On Jul 22, 2009, at 1:32 PM, Dan Gohman wrote: > >>>> >>>> - A null pointer is associated with no addresses. >>>> >>> >>> A null pointer in address space 0. >> >> I'm not fond of weird address-space semantics, but for consistency >> with what the optimizer is

...ing an extra parameter to the function definition, > defaulting to true. I'd rather not. The current API is messy enough already. Is there not another way to solve the problem? Evan > > static ExecutionEngine *create(ModuleProvider *MP, > bool ForceInterpreter = false, > std::string *ErrorStr = 0, > bool Fast = false, > bool EnumModules = true); > > And corresponding change to the function. > > ExecutionEngine *ExecutionEngine::create(Mo...

...definition, >> defaulting to true. > > I'd rather not. The current API is messy enough already. Is there not > another way to solve the problem? > > Evan > >> >>  static ExecutionEngine *create(ModuleProvider *MP, >>                                 bool ForceInterpreter = false, >>                                 std::string *ErrorStr = 0, >>                                 bool Fast = false, >>                                 bool EnumModules = true); >> >> And corresponding change to the function. >> >> ExecutionEngine...

I've also tried the next combination: true, // ForceInterpreter false, // UseMCJIT and ios app just crashed with no output 2014-09-18 0:47 GMT+06:00 Anton Smirnov <dev at antonsmirnov.name>: > Hey. > > I've checked out LLVM/Clang 3.5 and modified my static libs source code to > use the latest llvm/clang sources. > Also i'm tryin...

...definition, >> defaulting to true. > > I'd rather not. The current API is messy enough already. Is there not > another way to solve the problem? > > Evan > >> >>  static ExecutionEngine *create(ModuleProvider *MP, >>                                 bool ForceInterpreter = false, >>                                 std::string *ErrorStr = 0, >>                                 bool Fast = false, >>                                 bool EnumModules = true); >> >> And corresponding change to the function. >> >> ExecutionEngine...

...08:43, Anton Smirnov <dev at antonsmirnov.name> wrote: >> > i've changed lli arguments to the next (instead of default): >> > >> > return llvm_interpret( >> > InputFile, >> > std::vector<std::string>(), >> > false, // ForceInterpreter >> > false, // UseMCJIT >> > [...] >> > Now i'm having: >> > >> > Unhandled instruction encoding format! >> > UNREACHABLE executed at >> > >> /Users/asmirnov/Documents/dev/src/llvm_34_ios/lib/Target/ARM/ARMCodeEmitter.cp...

...kend, which is more their side. On 17 September 2014 08:43, Anton Smirnov <dev at antonsmirnov.name> wrote: > i've changed lli arguments to the next (instead of default): > > return llvm_interpret( > InputFile, > std::vector<std::string>(), > false, // ForceInterpreter > false, // UseMCJIT > [...] > Now i'm having: > > Unhandled instruction encoding format! > UNREACHABLE executed at > /Users/asmirnov/Documents/dev/src/llvm_34_ios/lib/Target/ARM/ARMCodeEmitter.cpp:547! This one at least is understandable. Your options imply (I could...

...est cases we have the easier it will be to > get MachO/ARM fully supported in MCJIT. > > Regards, > Lang. > > > On Wed, Sep 17, 2014 at 12:11 PM, Anton Smirnov <dev at antonsmirnov.name> > wrote: > >> I've also tried the next combination: >> true, // ForceInterpreter >> false, // UseMCJIT >> and ios app just crashed with no output >> >> 2014-09-18 0:47 GMT+06:00 Anton Smirnov <dev at antonsmirnov.name>: >> >>> Hey. >>> >>> I've checked out LLVM/Clang 3.5 and modified my static libs source code...

...=================================================================== --- tools/lli/lli.cpp (revision 73978) +++ tools/lli/lli.cpp (working copy) @@ -144,8 +144,11 @@ InitializeNativeTarget(); EE = ExecutionEngine::create(MP, ForceInterpreter, &ErrorMsg, OLvl); - if (!EE && !ErrorMsg.empty()) { - std::cerr << argv[0] << ":error creating EE: " << ErrorMsg << "\n"; + if (!EE) { + if (!ErrorMsg.empty()) + std::cerr << argv[0] << ":error creat...

...MCJIT. >>> >>> Regards, >>> Lang. >>> >>> >>> On Wed, Sep 17, 2014 at 12:11 PM, Anton Smirnov <dev at antonsmirnov.name> >>> wrote: >>> >>>> I've also tried the next combination: >>>> true, // ForceInterpreter >>>> false, // UseMCJIT >>>> and ios app just crashed with no output >>>> >>>> 2014-09-18 0:47 GMT+06:00 Anton Smirnov <dev at antonsmirnov.name>: >>>> >>>>> Hey. >>>>> >>>>> I've ch...

Hello all, I'm trying to bring an LLVM-based project that is working on Linux up on Win32. I am having problems with llvm::ExecutionEngine::create returning a NULL. I traced it to these lines: // Unless the interpreter was explicitly selected, try making a JIT. if (!ForceInterpreter && JITCtor) EE = JITCtor(MP, ErrorStr); // If we can't make a JIT, make an interpreter instead. if (EE == 0 && InterpCtor) EE = InterpCtor(MP, ErrorStr); JITCtor and InterpCtor are both NULL, so it's obvious why I'm getting back a NULL execution engine....

On Mon, Jun 22, 2009 at 4:43 PM, Chris Lattner <clattner at apple.com> wrote: > > On Jun 22, 2009, at 2:19 PM, Kasra wrote: > > Hi, > > for some reason I could not get the machine code generator for x86 > working. The interpreter is the only thing that works, is there > anything that I am missing here? > > This recently changed.  In your main program, please

...70, tm=@0x21ec400, tji=@0x21ec588, JMM=0x0) at JIT.cpp:102 #11 0x00375971 in llvm::JIT::createJIT (MP=0x5395170, ErrorStr=0x0, JMM=0x0) at TargetSelect.cpp:75 #12 0x0037667e in llvm::JIT::create (MP=0x5395170, Err=0x0) at JIT.h:76 #13 0x003648f8 in llvm::ExecutionEngine::create (MP=0x5395170, ForceInterpreter=false, ErrorStr=0x0) at ExecutionEngine.cpp:322 #14 0x003649b2 in llvm::ExecutionEngine::create (M=0x1902d20) at ExecutionEngine.cpp:341 #15 0x0011b8da in main (argc=1, argv=0xbffff164) at main.cpp:275 Am I doing something wrong? I've assumed it is ok to delete an execution engine becaus...

On Sat, 14 Aug 2004, Valery A.Khamenya wrote: > (thanks to Reid, who gave nice advice) the fibonacci function code > works now. Please find attached file. > > but... the performance is adequate, say, for byte-code > interpretation mode and not for optimized JITing. > fibonacci function of 35 from attached file is more > then 100 times slower then the following code compiled

Hi all, (thanks to Reid, who gave nice advice) the fibonacci function code works now. Please find attached file. but... the performance is adequate, say, for byte-code interpretation mode and not for optimized JITing. fibonacci function of 35 from attached file is more then 100 times slower then the following code compiled with "gcc -O2" : ----------- #include <iostream> int

...uot; << *str << std::endl; + return NULL; +} + //===----------------------------------------------------------------------===// // main Driver function // @@ -402,6 +426,12 @@ errno = 0; int Result; + + // Register the callbacks with EE->registerCustomCallback + if(!ForceInterpreter) { + EE->registerCustomCallback("Callback1", (reinterpret_cast<void*(*)()>(&Callback1))); + EE->registerCustomCallback("Callback2", (reinterpret_cast<void*(*)()>(&Callback2))); + } if (!RemoteMCJIT) { // If the program doesn't exp...