search for: gccs

http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=article&item=llvm_gcc_dragonegg28&num=1 as of version 2.8, LLVM is generating slower code than the newer GCCs but generates the code more quickly.

Puyan, There is a doc on the document page which describe the list of broken GCCs. You'll need to check it once the docs are online. Rajika On Sun, Feb 21, 2010 at 11:33 AM, Puyan Lotfi <puyan at gatech.edu> wrote: > Hi > > Does there exist a list of relative compile times for source files in LLVM? > I am doing a build for ARM on an actual ARM device, an...

Hi Edwin, >> http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=article&item=llvm_gcc_dragonegg28&num=1 >> as of version 2.8, LLVM is generating slower code than the newer GCCs >> but generates the code more quickly. >> > > I would be more concerned about the 'unable to compile', or 'compiled > code not working correctly' issues. It would help if they filed bugs. I analysed the dragonegg compile failures. The graphicsmagick, imagemag...

Hi Does there exist a list of relative compile times for source files in LLVM? I am doing a build for ARM on an actual ARM device, and CodeGenDAGPatterns.cpp is taking a really long time to compile (it's been like 20 minutes or more). I don't even get an error. All the files before it compile pretty quickly but this file in particular just won't finish. The version of gcc I have on

Hi, The problem is modern c++. I can have a reasonable system boostrape-ed with (tinycc/alternative C compiler), but only in the gcc world since a modern c++ compiler is only bootsrape-able from near any C compiler there. clang and llvm are unable to do it. That why I would need to get 2 gccs: "any C compiler" -> gcc 4.7.4 -> gcc recent_version -> llvm. On Fri, Oct 14, 2016 at 4:02 PM, Renato Golin <renato.golin at linaro.org> wrote: > On 13 October 2016 at 12:56, <sylvain.bertrand at gmail.com> wrote: >> It's my custom distro. My goal is to...

...igure: error: fd passing is required for Dovecot to work Which in the log corresponds to: configure:22685: ./conftest ./configure[2026]: eval: line 1: 22335: Memory fault(coredump) Appears to the option "-mfunction-return=thunk" that cause the problem, remove and no core dump. Older gccs do not have -mfunction-return. > as I have no problems in compiling dovecot and pigeonhole on my Solaris 11.3 system with gcc. The version that ships with my Solaris is 4.5.2. Strictly speaking Solaris 11 does not ship with gcc, one can install it [from the OS vendor] with pkg and there i...

...ront-end as possible. Mainly I need to find out dependencies and control flows, amongst a few other things. So far I've seen http://llvm.org/docs/LangRef.html which might be what I'm looking for, but I just wanted to make sure. Also I heard that there's something that can convert GCCs GIMPLE to llvm IR, which I looked up and I believe is llvm-gcc, but again, I want to make sure that's it. Also, is there a plugin that converts llvm IR to GIMPLE, or is there a project currently working on it? Thanks in advance! =) -nonpoly -- View this message in context: http://old.nabble...

..., and we have already developed a set of - now small and hopefully clean ;) - patches that address main deficiencies: - makefiles tweaked to be functional in all compilation modes (say, for ninja build) - Clang's gcc toolchain detection fixed (especially to handle multiple gccs installed on a system vs. hardcoded paths) - TLS relocations handling for SPARC fixed - JIT relocations handling for SPARC implemented After these changes we are able to bootstrap clang (which is completely impossible with current trunk on SPARC/Solaris). As well as successfully build/te...

On Mon, 8 Nov 2010 15:42:33 -0800 (PST) Samuel Crow <samuraileumas at yahoo.com> wrote: > http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=article&item=llvm_gcc_dragonegg28&num=1 > as of version 2.8, LLVM is generating slower code than the newer GCCs > but generates the code more quickly. > I would be more concerned about the 'unable to compile', or 'compiled code not working correctly' issues. It would help if they filed bugs. I don't know what is wrong with the BYTE benchmark for example, I thought its part of the...

>>> http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=article&item=llvm_gcc_dragonegg28&num=1 >>> as of version 2.8, LLVM is generating slower code than the newer GCCs >>> but generates the code more quickly. >>> >> >> I would be more concerned about the 'unable to compile', or 'compiled >> code not working correctly' issues. It would help if they filed bugs. It is claimed that the Byte Unix benchmarks compil...

...ave you tried with VFPv3/NEON? - On GCC 4.4.5 you're using "--with-float=softfp --with-fpu=vfpv3-d16" and (correctly) "--with-arch=armv7-a", which mode prevails? Soft or hard? - You're using Thumb on 4.4.5 and 4.5.2 only, any special reason not to use Thumb on previous GCCs? cheers, --renato

Hello, I would like to address an issue/inconsistency related to command line options and compiling for minimum code size, and wanted to check if there would be any problems or objections to my change. The problem is that compiling for minimum code size like this: -Oz --target=arm-arm--eabi -mcpu=cortex-xyz does not really give minimum code size because -mthumb is not enabled. This

...as much as they can of course. Let me know what if anything else I can do. On Tue, Aug 26, 2014 at 2:53 PM, Chandler Carruth <chandlerc at google.com> wrote: > Very sadly, someone just pointed out that the latest Ubuntu and Debian > installations of certain multiarch/cross-compiling GCCs are incompatible > with Clang's driver. > > I'm working on a fix now... > > > On Thu, Aug 21, 2014 at 10:55 AM, Bill Wendling <isanbard at gmail.com> > wrote: > >> The third 3.5 release candidate is now available. Please pick up sources >> and binar...

..."make ENABLE_OPTIMIZED=1 OPTIMIZE_OPTION=-O1" or build a debug build." I'm trying that now. -Puyan On Sun, Feb 21, 2010 at 1:22 AM, Rajika Kumarasiri <rajika at wso2.com> wrote: > > Puyan, > There is a doc on the document page which describe the list of broken GCCs. You'll need to check it once the docs are online. > > Rajika > > On Sun, Feb 21, 2010 at 11:33 AM, Puyan Lotfi <puyan at gatech.edu> wrote: >> >> Hi >> >> Does there exist a list of relative compile times for source files in LLVM? >> I am doing a...

...nly > I need to find out dependencies and control flows, amongst a few other > things. So far I've seen http://llvm.org/docs/LangRef.html which might be > what I'm looking for, but I just wanted to make sure. Yes. > Also I heard that there's something that can convert GCCs GIMPLE to llvm > IR, which I looked up and I believe is llvm-gcc, but again, I want to make > sure that's it. Also, is there a plugin that converts llvm IR to GIMPLE, or > is there a project currently working on it? Yes, there's llvm-gcc which is a modified gcc 4.2. It's gett...

The third 3.5 release candidate is now available. Please pick up sources and binaries here: https://llvm.org/pre-release/3.5 Run it through its phases and report any bugs you find! Share and enjoy! -bw

...e BSS section anymore; instead it is put into RODATA. (See the thread at [0], especially [1]) In filter/nozero a 64M large, static, zeroed, read-only array is declared. The new behavior of GCC puts this array as-is into the binary inflating the size by a factor of around 10000. (Clang 8 and older GCCs work "correctly") It would be possible to remove the "const" qualifier or use some compiler attribute trickery to get the previous behavior back. Thanks, Thomas [0] https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc/2019-04/msg00034.html [1] https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc/2019-04/msg00049.html

...RIVSEP_CHROOT_DIR=\"/var/empty\" > -DHAVE_CONFIG_H -c packet.c -o packet.o > "/usr/include/openssl/objects.h", line 1009.31: 1506-275 (S) Unexpected > text free_func encountered. > make: 1254-004 The error code from the last command is 1. I also ran into this on old GCCs. It seems to be related to include orders although I don't understand why. On a hunch I tried this which seems to fix it for me, but again I don't understand why... Does it also help for you? diff --git a/packet.c b/packet.c index b1219c8..b15f02f 100644 --- a/packet.c +++ b/packet.c @@...

Is there a required Clang and LLVM version one needs to do a ''make xen-dist clang=y''? I recently tried and the process failed. I haven''t begun debugging as I figured I would ask the obvious first. The build failed with the following: ... make[4]: Entering directory `/home/builder/xen-unstable/xen/drivers'' make -f /home/builder/xen-unstable/xen/Rules.mk -C char

I did some more extensive testing and found that all GCCs older than 7 trigger the warning, but only if CMAKE_BUILD_TYPE=Release (which I guess indicates optimizations are enabled). There's a patch up for disabling the warning here: https://reviews.llvm.org/D50607. I still feel a little uncomfortable, because I think Jonathan makes an excellent poin...