search for: getflags

...ly it hasn't, since we are >> trying to determine which symbols need to be materialized... > > > If Finalized == false, then we should be hitting this: > > if (!Finalized) > return JITSymbol(getSymbolMaterializer(Name), > SymEntry->second.getFlags()); > > That's not a null symbol, it's a lazy symbol with a materializer attached. > It *should* compare non-null in the following test > in getResponsibilitySetWithLegacyFn, which in turn should cause it to be > added to the responsibility set: > > if (JITSymbol Sy...

...ince we are trying to determine which symbols need to be materialized... My quick fix is to change these lines in LegacyRTDyldObjectLinkingLayerBase::LinkedObject::getSymbol(): if (!Finalized) return JITSymbol(getSymbolMaterializer(Name), SymEntry->second.getFlags()); to: if (!Finalized || SymEntry->second.getAddress() == 0) return JITSymbol(getSymbolMaterializer(Name), SymEntry->second.getFlags()); That works for me, but I am not sure it is the right way to do it... Perhaps somebody else has a better idea? Ge...

...oubt about this interface. In >> particolar: > >It''s the interface that I would like to be discussed. Thanks! > >> - how get the flags of a subvolume ? I suggest to implement a pair of ioctls: >> - subvolume_setflags -> get the flags >> - subvolume_getflags -> set the flags >> These ioctls would be more generic (there are a lot of flags which may be >> interested to put in the "root" of a subvolume: think about >> compress/nocompress, (no)datasum...) >> - For the reason abowe, I suggest to replace SNAPSHOT with...

I'm curious why the condition to fuse is this: // Floating-point multiply-add with intermediate rounding. bool HasFMAD = (LegalOperations && TLI.isOperationLegal(ISD::FMAD, VT)); static bool isContractable(SDNode *N) { SDNodeFlags F = N->getFlags(); return F.hasAllowContract() || F.hasAllowReassociation(); } bool CanFuse = Options.UnsafeFPMath || isContractable(N); bool AllowFusionGlobally = (Options.AllowFPOpFusion == FPOpFusion::Fast || CanFuse || HasFMAD); // If the addition is not contractable, do not combine. if (!AllowFusionGloball...

...moperands differ, then the instructions are + // not identical. + for (MachineInstr::mmo_iterator mb1 = memoperands_begin(), mb2 = Other->memoperands_begin() + me = memoperands_end(); mb1 != me; ++mb1, ++mb2) { + if (mb1->getSize() != mb2->getSize() || + mb1->getFlags() != mb2->getFlags() || + mb1->getOffset() != mb2->getOffset()) { + return false; + } + } + } + // Check operands to make sure they match. for (unsigned i = 0, e = getNumOperands(); i != e; ++i) { const MachineOperand &MO = getOperand(i); So, my qu...

Hi On Windows 10 when using a debug build of LLVM 10, I get this assertion failure: Assertion failed: (KV.second.getFlags() & ~WeakFlags) == (I->second & ~WeakFlags) && "Resolving symbol with incorrect flags", file C:\work\github\llvm-10.0.0.src\lib\ExecutionEngine\Orc\Core.cpp, line 450 The same failure occurred in LLVM 9 too: Assertion failed: I->second == KV.second.getFlags() &...

...e instructions are > + // not identical. > + for (MachineInstr::mmo_iterator mb1 = memoperands_begin(), mb2 = Other->memoperands_begin() > + me = memoperands_end(); mb1 != me; ++mb1, ++mb2) { > + if (mb1->getSize() != mb2->getSize() || > + mb1->getFlags() != mb2->getFlags() || > + mb1->getOffset() != mb2->getOffset()) { > + return false; > + } > + } > + } > + > // Check operands to make sure they match. > for (unsigned i = 0, e = getNumOperands(); i != e; ++i) { > const Machi...

...on to my JIT context, and I create a lambda resolver as such: JITContext::addModule(…) { auto Resolver = createLambdaResolver( [&](const std::string &name) { // look up first in JIT'ed code if (auto sym = findMangledSymbol(name)) { return RuntimeDyld::SymbolInfo(sym.getAddress(), sym.getFlags()); return RuntimeDyld::SymbolInfo(nullptr); } // look up in added globals if (auto addr = getPointerToGlobalMapping(name)) { return RuntimeDyld::SymbolInfo(addr, JITSymbolFlags::Exported); } // finally try to look up existing process symbols, note // this works for symbols loaded in shared libra...

I mean, we just skip over instructions without a DebugLoc: void CodeViewDebug::beginInstruction(const MachineInstr *MI) { DebugHandlerBase::beginInstruction(MI); // Ignore DBG_VALUE locations and function prologue. if (!Asm || !CurFn || MI->isDebugValue() || MI->getFlag(MachineInstr::FrameSetup)) return; DebugLoc DL = MI->getDebugLoc(); if (DL == PrevInstLoc || !DL)

...why the condition to fuse is this: > > // Floating-point multiply-add with intermediate rounding. >   bool HasFMAD = (LegalOperations && > TLI.isOperationLegal(ISD::FMAD, VT)); > > static bool isContractable(SDNode *N) { >   SDNodeFlags F = N->getFlags(); >   return F.hasAllowContract() || F.hasAllowReassociation(); > } > > bool CanFuse = Options.UnsafeFPMath || isContractable(N); > bool AllowFusionGlobally = (Options.AllowFPOpFusion == > FPOpFusion::Fast || CanFuse || HasFMAD); > // If the addition...

...ext::addModule(…) { >> >> auto Resolver = createLambdaResolver( >> [&](const std::string &name) { >> >> // look up first in JIT'ed code >> if (auto sym = findMangledSymbol(name)) { >> return RuntimeDyld::SymbolInfo(sym.getAddress(), >> sym.getFlags()); >> return RuntimeDyld::SymbolInfo(nullptr); >> } >> >> // look up in added globals >> if (auto addr = getPointerToGlobalMapping(name)) { >> return RuntimeDyld::SymbolInfo(addr, JITSymbolFlags::Exported); >> } >> >> // finally try to look up...

... // Floating-point multiply-add with intermediate rounding. > >        bool HasFMAD = (LegalOperations && > >     TLI.isOperationLegal(ISD::FMAD, VT)); > > > >     static bool isContractable(SDNode *N) { > >        SDNodeFlags F = N->getFlags(); > >        return F.hasAllowContract() || F.hasAllowReassociation(); > >     } > > > >     bool CanFuse = Options.UnsafeFPMath || isContractable(N); > >     bool AllowFusionGlobally = (Options.AllowFPOpFusion == > >     FPOpFusion...

...>>> auto Resolver = createLambdaResolver( >>> [&](const std::string &name) { >>> >>> // look up first in JIT'ed code >>> if (auto sym = findMangledSymbol(name)) { >>> return RuntimeDyld::SymbolInfo(sym.getAddress(), >>> sym.getFlags()); >>> return RuntimeDyld::SymbolInfo(nullptr); >>> } >>> >>> // look up in added globals >>> if (auto addr = getPointerToGlobalMapping(name)) { >>> return RuntimeDyld::SymbolInfo(addr, JITSymbolFlags::Exported); >>> } >>> &gt...

...t; auto Resolver = createLambdaResolver( >>> [&](const std::string &name) { >>> >>> // look up first in JIT'ed code >>> if (auto sym = findMangledSymbol(name)) { >>> return RuntimeDyld::SymbolInfo(sym.getAddress(), >>> sym.getFlags()); >>> return RuntimeDyld::SymbolInfo(nullptr); >>> } >>> >>> // look up in added globals >>> if (auto addr = getPointerToGlobalMapping(name)) { >>> return RuntimeDyld::SymbolInfo(addr, JITSymbolFlags::Exported); >>> } >&gt...

...rc) { auto Resolver = llvm::orc::createLambdaResolver( // External lookup functor [&](const std::string &name) { if (auto Sym = Compilelayer.findSymbol(name, true)) return llvm::RuntimeDyld::SymbolInfo(Sym.getAddress(), Sym.getFlags()); // If not found as a symbol, look up in current process. // Why doesn't this work? if (auto Addr = llvm::RTDyldMemoryManager::getSymbolAddressInProcess(name)) return llvm::RuntimeDyld::SymbolInfo(Addr, llvm::JITSymbolFlags:...

Well, I agree the front end must be responsible for (not) instantiating the function templates. However the problem shows up only when JIT compiling, for some reason, and only with LLVM 8. Is there perhaps something else that needs to be done before resolving symbols, in addition to running constructors, to ensure that instantiated function templates are taken into account? Or perhaps there is

With the MIPS compiler, when we have static constants, in the .s file we get something like: .type $.str33, at object # @.str33 .section .rodata.str1.1,"aMS", at progbits,1 $.str33: .asciz "//" .size $.str33, 3 Currently when we create direct object code we are referencing the symbol as an offset in .rodata and not directly using

...rounding. > >      >        bool HasFMAD = (LegalOperations && > >      >     TLI.isOperationLegal(ISD::FMAD, VT)); > >      > > >      >     static bool isContractable(SDNode *N) { > >      >        SDNodeFlags F = N->getFlags(); > >      >        return F.hasAllowContract() || > F.hasAllowReassociation(); > >      >     } > >      > > >      >     bool CanFuse = Options.UnsafeFPMath || isContractable(N); > >      >     bool AllowFusionGlobally...

I've been playing with Fred Riss's "line 0" patch for DWARF (https://reviews.llvm.org/D16569) but in adapting it for current trunk, I find the DwarfDebug stuff has been refactored to allow either DWARF or CodeView. That's all good, but the question is whether the "line 0" patch should be DWARF-specific or common. The DWARF spec explicitly states that code not

...ermediate rounding. >>> > bool HasFMAD = (LegalOperations && >>> > TLI.isOperationLegal(ISD::FMAD, VT)); >>> > >>> > static bool isContractable(SDNode *N) { >>> > SDNodeFlags F = N->getFlags(); >>> > return F.hasAllowContract() || F.hasAllowReassociation(); >>> > } >>> > >>> > bool CanFuse = Options.UnsafeFPMath || isContractable(N); >>> > bool AllowFusionGlobally = (Options.AllowFPO...