search for: frame_dummi

> On May 17, 2016, at 1:33 AM, Shi, Steven via llvm-dev <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: > > Hello, > Let me ask a LTO simple question again. For the llvm LTO example in the link:http://llvm.org/docs/LinkTimeOptimization.html <http://llvm.org/docs/LinkTimeOptimization.html>, I use below build commands to generate three different optimization level binary: -O0, -O1, -O2.

Here's a working testcase: ; ModuleID = '/tmp/crtbegin.bc' target datalayout = "E-p:32:32:128-i1:8:128-i8:8:128-i16:16:128-i32:32:128-i64:32:128-f32:32:128-f64:64:128-v64:64:64-v128:128:128-a0:0:128-s0:128:128" target triple = "spu" @__dso_handle = hidden global i8* null, align 16 ; <i8**> [#uses=0] @__CTOR_LIST__ = internal global [1 x void

Hi Warren, You have the -m32 flag set, but it's still giving you this: > Warning: Generation of 64-bit code for a 32-bit processor requested. > Warning: 64-bit processors all have at least SSE2. But are you sure you want to compile the LLVM-GCC source? You should use the binaries unless absolutely necessary. -bw On May 24, 2007, at 10:34 PM, Warren Armstrong wrote: > Hi all,

Hi all, Working on lld aarch64 support I came across an issue where I am not sure which would be best design approach to solve. The aarch64 R_AARCH64_ABS64 relocation for PIC/PIE build requires a dynamic relocation (R_AARCH64_RELATIVE) with the value set as the addend of the relocation. For instance, when linking the crtbeginS.o which contains: Relocation section '.rela.init_array' at

Hi Warren, you can try to configure with the following export CFLAGS="-m64" export LDFLAGS="-L/usr/lib64" LLVM: ../src/configure --prefix=`pwd`../install --enable-optimized --enable-jit --enable-targets=host-only make LLVM-GCC: ../llvm-gcc4-2.0.source/configure --prefix=`pwd`../install --program-prefix=llvm- --enable-llvm=/home/warren/llvm/obj/ --enable-languages=c,c++

Hi all, I've run into problems compiling the llvm-gcc frontend on x86_64. Is this not supported, or am I making an error somewhere? The procedure I followed was: 1. Download LLVM 2.0 source as a tarball (from a few days ago, during the testing phase). 2. Download the llvm-gcc4 source today, as a tarball. 3. Extract both. 4. Configure LLVM as: ../src/configure --prefix=`pwd`../install

Hi Umesh, Thank you for the suggestion. I can use the "Brute force method " to narrow down the LTO wrong instructions here and there, but I still don't know why these wrong instructions are generated, and how to let Clang LTO don't generate those wrong instructions. I suspect the wrong code is caused by some LTO wrong optimization pass, so I hope to disable all optimizations in

I read the README and I think I noted all the relevant pitfalls, but something still goes wrong. I didn't see anything similar in this months list archives either. On the other hand, I see the release notes do not list linux x86_64 as a known good architecture - only linux IA32 (though MacOS X is said to be supported on x86 in 64 bit mode). Am I trying to do the impossible? $ tar xvf

> On May 17, 2016, at 11:21 AM, Umesh Kalappa <umesh.kalappa0 at gmail.com> wrote: > > Steven, > > As mehdi stated , the optimisation level is specific to linker and it > enables Inter-Pro opts passes ,please refer function To be very clear: the -O option may trigger *linker* optimizations as well, independently of LTO. -- Mehdi > >

Hi all! I played around with the LLVM LTO example(https://llvm.org/docs/LinkTimeOptimization.html#example-of-link-time-optimization), but got some questions. As the document says, the function foo4 should be removed. However, under my test, function foo4 is not removed. I have tried both gnu ld with LLVMgold.so and lld, neither of them removes function foo4. I compile and run the example as

Hello, I'm wondering why only some global static variables are marked with __used__ attributes in llvm-gcc/gcc/crtstuff.c. GCC compiles crtstuff.c with -fno-toplevel-reorder option, which ensures that unused static globals are not removed during optimization. However, since LLVM does not support that option, I presume __used__ attribute is used instead. For example, __CTOR_LIST__[1]

Hi, I tried compiling llvm-gcc front end by giving the configure commands : $ ../llvm-gcc4-2.0.source/configure --enable-checking --enable-languages=c --target=arm-none-linux But I am getting the following kind of assembeler errors when I do "make $BUILDOPTIONS" /tmp/ccYAgFFY.s: Assembler messages: /tmp/ccYAgFFY.s:36: Error: junk at end of line, first unrecognized character is

Martin, Well, thanks for jumping in! We need all the help we can get ;) I changed the execute bit as you suggested and recompiled, no luck, still the same error message. Below is the output you wanted me to look at, its a bit beyond me so I include both a brief grep summary and then the whole enchilada. I do note that my output is different from yours, but I'm not sure how to interpret. I

Martin, Well, thanks for jumping in! We need all the help we can get ;) I changed the execute bit as you suggested and recompiled, no luck, still the same error message. Below is the output you wanted me to look at, its a bit beyond me so I include both a brief grep summary and then the whole enchilada. I do note that my output is different from yours, but I'm not sure how to interpret. I

I updated the patch to read a call graph from a text file. I tested it with the attached call.txt from lld linking chromium. Unfortunately the resulting lld doesn't seem any faster. One thing I noticed is that the most used symbols seem to be at the end of the file. In any case, can you add tests and send the lld patch for review? Thanks, Rafael On 31 July 2017 at 15:19, Davide Italiano

A rebased version of the lld patch is attached. Cheers, Rafael On 31 July 2017 at 15:11, Rafael Avila de Espindola <rafael.espindola at gmail.com> wrote: > Tobias Edler von Koch <tobias at codeaurora.org> writes: > >> Hi Rafael, >> >> On 07/31/2017 04:20 PM, Rafael Avila de Espindola via llvm-dev wrote: >>> However, do we need to start with