search for: gardas

On 06/24/11 06:53 PM, Eli Friedman wrote: > On Fri, Jun 24, 2011 at 9:12 AM, Karel Gardas<karel.gardas at centrum.cz> wrote: >> My question is if it is a known bug or unknown in which case where to >> report it and if also include compiled *.bc file or not. > > Haven't seen it before... see > http://llvm.org/docs/HowToSubmitABug.html , and please do inclu...

Hello, I asked here for kind of reference GCC version which LLVM development team is using for *native* testing on ARM hardware. (no cross compilation!) last week or so. I've been curious myself how the situation looks and so I tested LLVM 2.9 as a reference point and LLVM HEAD as of June 29 on ARMv7 (two boards with two different Ubuntu versions) compiled by GCC 4.3.4, 4.4.1, 4.4.5,

On Fri, Jun 24, 2011 at 10:06 AM, Karel Gardas <karel.gardas at centrum.cz> wrote: > On 06/24/11 06:53 PM, Eli Friedman wrote: >> >> On Fri, Jun 24, 2011 at 9:12 AM, Karel Gardas<karel.gardas at centrum.cz> >>  wrote: >>> >>> My question is if it is a known bug or unknown in which case where to...

Hello, I'm trying to find myself, but anyway, I'm curious what's the recommended GNU C++ version for LLVM compilation on ARM/Linux platform? I'm using various version of Ubuntu and so far the best compiler I found was 4.4.1 (Ubuntu 4.4.1-4ubuntu9)[1]. With this and with just -O1 as optimize option I've been able to get to 1 failing testcase. Other tested were 4.4.3 and

On 26 June 2011 10:16, Karel Gardas <karel.gardas at centrum.cz> wrote: > So I'm curious what's *the* recommended compiler on this platform which > LLVM development is using? Hi Karel, I'm not sure what test cases you're talking about, but we use CodeSourcery's GCC and binutils (latests, not stable,...

On 06/27/11 12:46 PM, Renato Golin wrote: > On 26 June 2011 10:16, Karel Gardas<karel.gardas at centrum.cz> wrote: >> So I'm curious what's *the* recommended compiler on this platform which >> LLVM development is using? > > Hi Karel, > > I'm not sure what test cases you're talking about, but we use > CodeSourcery's GCC and...

On Fri, Jul 8, 2011 at 1:13 AM, Karel Gardas <karel.gardas at centrum.cz> wrote: > On 07/ 4/11 01:39 AM, Eli Friedman wrote: >> >> For the JIT failures, it would be nice if you could track down the SVN >> revision when it started failing.  (We have an ARM buildbot at >> http://google1.osuosl.org:8011/builders/...

On 08/ 1/12 05:14 AM, Marshall Clow wrote: > Anyone know the status of this patch? > Did it get applied? Rejected? Ok'ed but not applied? Hello, as far as I know, it's not presented in today's HEAD. Thanks, Karel

On 1 August 2012 09:17, Karel Gardas <karel.gardas at centrum.cz> wrote: > as far as I know, it's not presented in today's HEAD. If you want it applied, you have to send it to llvm-commits, not here. If you sent it there already, ping the thread that people will respond. -- cheers, --renato http://systemcall.org/

Hi Renato, On 07/ 5/11 12:20 PM, Renato Golin wrote: > On 3 July 2011 21:32, Karel Gardas<karel.gardas at centrum.cz> wrote: >> please see http://ghcarm.wordpress.com/2011/07/03/llvm-on-arm-testing/ >> >> Is there anything other I might do for you to get those regressions fixed? > > Hi Karel, > > This is great! > > I can see there's only a...

On 3 July 2011 21:32, Karel Gardas <karel.gardas at centrum.cz> wrote: > please see http://ghcarm.wordpress.com/2011/07/03/llvm-on-arm-testing/ > > Is there anything other I might do for you to get those regressions fixed? Hi Karel, This is great! I can see there's only a handful of errors. All JIT errors seem...

...am not that familiar with ARM so could easily have missed something). My main concern is why are you avoiding using the R0 - R3 registers? Also, could you please update me on the status of this work. I assume you are getting GHC running in registerised mode on ARM. There is also a guy called Karel Gardas (karel.gardas at centrum.cz) who is working on this as well and making good progress. Would be good (off this mailing list though) to all get in contact. Cheers, David On 30 June 2011 17:16, Stephen Blackheath [to LLVM-dev] <effusively.proffer.stephen at blacksapphire.com> wrote: > All,...

On 07/ 4/11 01:39 AM, Eli Friedman wrote: > For the JIT failures, it would be nice if you could track down the SVN > revision when it started failing. (We have an ARM buildbot at > http://google1.osuosl.org:8011/builders/clang-native-arm-cortex-a9 , > but the JIT was already broken when it was set up.) I've used my i.MX53 board to get this, but I'm returning it today back to

...10:41 PM, Cameron Zwarich wrote: > They work pretty well now, at least on Thumb2 / Darwin. It is still fairly conservative about when to use tail calls, and doesn't support GuaranteedTailCallOpt, which might be necessary for GHC. > > Cameron > > On Jun 17, 2011, at 1:31 PM, Karel Gardas wrote: > >> >> John, >> >> I've moved with patches to HEAD and unfortunately the comments about >> disabling tailcalls do not go away with this update. Please see >> ARMTargetLowering::LowerCall in lib/Target/ARM/ARMISelLowering.cpp line >> 1208 and...

All, I would like to submit the attached patch, which allows the GHC (Glasgow Haskell Compiler) calling convention to work on ARM targets. Could some nice person please review this code, so I can move towards getting it committed? I have thoroughly tested this patch again GHC on a Debian-ARM (armel) system. Unfortunately my understanding of LLVM is limited, so it's likely I'm not

I don't know if GuaranteedTailCallOpt is in anyone's plans. It might be a good idea to implement some time. I am not sure what GHC's exact needs are, though. Cameron On Jun 17, 2011, at 1:49 PM, Karel Gardas wrote: > > Hello Cameron, > > thanks a lot for your fast answer, which just makes me curious if making ARM tailcalls on par with x86 in the future is on some of the development plans already? If not, then what do you think is the complexity of such work? > > Thanks! > Karel...

David, Thanks for that - I emailed Karel Gardas. I've got GHC successfully registerised on ARM, and I'm just starting on pushing it upstream. The reason why I'm avoiding the R0-R3 registers is mainly because my qemu-based ARM VM takes days to compile everything, and I was being conservative. The GHC code can call directly out to...

On Sun, Jul 3, 2011 at 11:32 PM, Karel Gardas <karel.gardas at centrum.cz> wrote: > Hello, > > I asked here for kind of reference GCC version which LLVM development > team is using for *native* testing on ARM hardware. (no cross > compilation!) last week or so. I've been curious myself how the > situation looks and...

On 06/29/12 11:12 PM, Renato Golin wrote: > On 29 June 2012 17:46, Karel Gardas<karel.gardas at centrum.cz> wrote: >> Yes and no. Shortly: original GHC/ARM/LLVM port was done by Stephen on >> ARMv5/Qemu IIRC. I've later added whole VFP support and ARMv7 support. The >> code in GHC is properly #ifdefed, so if there is no VFP available on pre >&gt...

On 06/16/11 11:00 PM, John McCall wrote: > On Jun 16, 2011, at 1:35 PM, Karel Gardas wrote: >> I'm working on implementing GHC specific call convention into LLVM >> 2.9. I've chosen LLVM 2.9 as a kind of stable reference point and I >> would like to know how mature is ARM code generation chain inside >> this release. I've had a hope that perhaps...