search for: garbagecollect

Here''s the status of the patch for Ruby that solves the freezing issue on Windows. ----- Forwarded message from "U.Nakamura" <usa@garbagecollect.jp> ----- Date: Sun, 6 Feb 2005 14:58:19 +0900 From: "U.Nakamura" <usa@garbagecollect.jp> To: ruby-core@ruby-lang.org Subject: Re: windows socket connection freeze Hello, In message "windows socket connection freeze" on Feb.05,2005 23:04:46, <wmorgan-ruby-core...

...I > needed to declare that as a function. The term intrinsic made me > think it was a built-in instruction. Probably best would be to state that clearly in http://llvm.org/docs/LangRef.html#intrinsics and hyperlink the first instance of 'intrinsic' (within each section?) of GarbageCollection.html. Possibly add the terms 'declare' to each of the intrinsics documented at http://llvm.org/docs/GarbageCollection.html#core . — Gordon

Everything described in GarbageCollection.html should now be live. Phew! The collectors could use a review, but they compile, have no impact unless used, and tests would otherwise have had to be XFAILed waiting on them. The ShadowStackCollector has one issue that may be of interest in that it adds constant globals in a runOnFunc...

I recently added initial support for accurate GC to LLVM, as described in this document: http://llvm.cs.uiuc.edu/docs/GarbageCollection.html I've started implementing a trivial copying collector as a testcase for it, but it is not done yet. All code generators support identification of roots on the stack though. If you're interested in such things, I would really appreciate feedback on the document, especially from fr...

...y need the location inside the stack frames of > > GC-ed pointers) > > I'm not the person to ask about GC, I'll let Chris Lattner chime in on > this. You can read a previous discussion about scheme GC and LLVM: This is documented fairly extensively here: http://llvm.org/docs/GarbageCollection.html#gcimpl -Chris -- http://llvm.org/ http://nondot.org/sabre/

I'm trying to add gcoot functionality to my code and I'm confused by why gcroot is assuming to be an i8** I'm using i32 as object and array pointers and if I make them i8 things seem to work. I'm generating IR much like http://llvm.org/docs/GarbageCollection.html#llvm-ir-features void @llvm.gcroot(i8** %ptrloc, i8* %metadata) -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/attachments/20150331/e56a0aa2/attachment.html>

Hello! I'm looking at "Overview of available features" here: http://llvm.org/docs/GarbageCollection.html#collector-algos and can't understand something. First, does table header mean that there are already some GC's implemented besides "shadow stack"? E.g. can I just use them? Second, does row "JIT", "NO" mean that GC is not compatible with jitting at all?...

...a contract between the specific codegen you're using > and the GC runtime you're using. This contract is specific to the current > ocaml code generator. > > In the LLVM world, you should use the first-class support we already have > for accurate GC: http://llvm.org/docs/GarbageCollection.html I was wondering recently: are there actually any projects that are using these facilities? Preferably ones that I could take a look at? > Based on this, you annotate the variables with llvm.gcroot intrinsics, and > then walk the stack with the llvm_cg_walk_gcroots function. Note...

...his table. The table is a contract between the specific codegen you're using and the GC runtime you're using. This contract is specific to the current ocaml code generator. In the LLVM world, you should use the first-class support we already have for accurate GC: http://llvm.org/docs/GarbageCollection.html Based on this, you annotate the variables with llvm.gcroot intrinsics, and then walk the stack with the llvm_cg_walk_gcroots function. Note that these are not well tested and probably have holes in them, but these are the interfaces we want to use :) -Chris -- http://nondot.org/sabr...

...o implement GC for a language supporting multiple threads. There will be no shared state between threads as communication will be based on message passing. I do not care much about performance. The priority for me is to get things working. I have read LLVM guide on writing GC: http://llvm.org/docs/GarbageCollection.html. Shadow stack approach looks very promising. The problem is, as described in the guide, shadow stack is single thread solution. It would be ideal if I could get LLVM to create a shadow stack on per thread basis. How could this be achieved? Thanks, Paweł. -------------- next part ----------...

...ter alloca. I'm not sure whether that means it > must be an alloca (which is always a pointer by definition) or an alloca > *of* a pointer. I'm pretty sure it should be "alloca of a pointer", as the first argument of llvm.gcroot has type i8**. However, http://llvm.org/docs/GarbageCollection.html#gcroot, isn't completely clear on this: "The first argument must be a value referring to an alloca instruction or a bitcast of an alloca." This last sentence seems to rule out passing GEPs on alloca's to llvm.gcroot. > What I am trying to figure out is how to declare...

Browsing http://llvm.org/releases/2.5/docs/GarbageCollection.html#ocaml I stumbled across the sentence "...The ocaml collector does not use read or write barriers, so the user program may use load and store instead of llvm.gcread and llvm.gcwrite..." Which I believe is wrong as the ocaml collector does indeed use a write barrier (caml_modify)...

On Monday 07 January 2008 02:32:47 Gordon Henriksen wrote: > Everything described in GarbageCollection.html should now be live. Phew! > > The collectors could use a review, but they compile, have no impact > unless used, and tests would otherwise have had to be XFAILed waiting > on them. > > The ShadowStackCollector has one issue that may be of interest in that > it adds cons...

...ion how to compile code to use the GC. A small code example and the flags to llvm to compile it. Thanks, Tobias On Mon, 24 May 2004, Chris Lattner wrote: > > I recently added initial support for accurate GC to LLVM, as described in > this document: > > http://llvm.cs.uiuc.edu/docs/GarbageCollection.html > > I've started implementing a trivial copying collector as a testcase for > it, but it is not done yet. All code generators support identification of > roots on the stack though. > > If you're interested in such things, I would really appreciate feedback on >...

Hey, I am a bit confused about the CollectorRegistry. I am attempting to write a garbage collector for LLVM, and the tiny example in the docs at http://llvm.org/releases/2.3/docs/GarbageCollection.html gives this line: CollectorRegistry::Add<MyCollector> X("mygc", "My bespoke garbage collector."); My question is now: Am I supposed to instantiate my collector manually, and tell LLVM about it, or can the Registry instantiate it, and it that case, how to go abo...

Hi all, I've been looking through the documentation (http://llvm.org/docs/GarbageCollection.html) on how to implement a garbage collector for LLVM and there's a couple of things that I don't quite understand. Specifically, it says that when a stack variable goes out of scope, you're supposed to assign a null value to it to indicate that the value is no longer live. Wha...

I've written a reference-counting garbage collector for LLVM, but I'm still unclear on a few things. The following piece of code that appears on http://llvm.cs.uiuc.edu/docs/GarbageCollection.html is unclear: ;; As the pointer goes out of scope, store a null value into ;; it, to indicate that the value is no longer live. store %Object* null, %Object** %X ... How exactly does this indicate X is no longer live? Is this internal code-generator logic/magic? The problem I...

...er to find GC > roots. It needs to know the stack pointer, the frame pointer, > possibly static links (if we allow nested functions), and where in > the stack frame local variables live. > > How do you get access to this data in a platform-agnostic manner? http://llvm.org/docs/GarbageCollection.html#stack-map >> Such a runtime will further need a way to crawl the native call >> stack and discover the return address of each call frame. LLVM >> doesn't provide such a facility. > > I guess I'm missing something here. Why does the GC need the return &...

...with the JIT. You can just use LLVM's internal representations of frames. Hope that helps, Nicolas On Thu, Sep 16, 2010 at 8:30 PM, lost <lostfreeman at gmail.com> wrote: > Hello! > > I'm looking at "Overview of available features" here: > http://llvm.org/docs/GarbageCollection.html#collector-algos and can't > understand something. > First, does table header mean that there are already some GC's > implemented besides "shadow stack"? E.g. can I just use them? > Second, does row "JIT", "NO" mean that GC is not compatible...

Thanks, Reid. When you say the frontend needs to know about how LLVM implements it, do you mean, the Function* type in LLVM, and in which order you add to the arguments array when building this type? Thank you for the video link, just reading the abstract I see this is the way to go. However, as I finished typing the sentence, I wonder if this means clang and/or llvm may be a runtime dependency.