search for: gvenn

I've worked around this issue in my test case by simply calling my personality function on program to ensure it's JIT'ed before any unwind happens. -- James 2010/1/22 Garrison Venn <gvenn.cfe.dev at gmail.com> > No, there is no magic. :-) > > To me though, the tools are magic, because I have no clue what they are > doing without looking at them and using them. > As their function is not germane to my current endeavors, I hope to learn > about them from this lis...

On Sun, Jan 10, 2010 at 12:38 PM, Garrison Venn <gvenn.cfe.dev at gmail.com> wrote: > Won't passing llvm::Function* around vs strings (function names), also work, at code generation time, > without the need for a module A dec to module B impl. mapping? > > Garrison Nope. You cannot place a call instruction into one module whose cal...

...3 0x0000000000d66974 in llvm::ExecutionEngine::runFunctionAsMain (this=0x1781e90, Fn=0x1718900, argv=..., envp=0x7fffffffe6c8) at ExecutionEngine.cpp:389 #24 0x00000000009012fc in main (argc=3, argv=0x7fffffffe6a8, envp=0x7fffffffe6c8) at lli.cpp:216 -- James On 22/01/2010, Garrison Venn <gvenn.cfe.dev at gmail.com> wrote: > Interesting. Was this the reason you were getting the recursive compilation > error in JIT::runJITOnFunctionUnlocked(...) (isAlreadyCodeGenerating)? > Do you have the time to try your test with 2.7? > > Garrison > > On Jan 22, 2010, at 17:37, J...

...est with 2.7? Garrison On Jan 22, 2010, at 17:37, James Williams wrote: > I've worked around this issue in my test case by simply calling my personality function on program to ensure it's JIT'ed before any unwind happens. > > -- James > > 2010/1/22 Garrison Venn <gvenn.cfe.dev at gmail.com> > No, there is no magic. :-) > > To me though, the tools are magic, because I have no clue what they are doing without looking at them and using them. > As their function is not germane to my current endeavors, I hope to learn about them from this list, and mos...

[sidenote: Please try to avoid extraneous whitespace and line wrapping changes in your patches. It makes it harder to see what you're actually changing] On Fri, Feb 26, 2010 at 4:57 AM, Garrison Venn <gvenn.cfe.dev at gmail.com>wrote: > Hi Olivier, > > On Feb 25, 2010, at 14:10, Olivier Meurant wrote: > > Hi Garrison, > > I finally come back from holidays and take time to watch your patch. > > I must say that I largely prefer this version over the previous one ! I > l...

On Sat, Jul 23, 2011 at 2:36 AM, Garrison Venn <gvenn.cfe.dev at gmail.com> wrote: > Hi Bill, > > Thanks for working on this. > > Is there a reference for the function attribute uwtable, or is it to be defined as > part of this effort? It already exists; there's some limited documentation in the LLVM source, but Rafael appare...

...ing patch for bug 2606". I'll keep that one alive. On Feb 26, 2010, at 21:23, Jeffrey Yasskin wrote: > FWIW, I don't like the idea of adding a new JIT class to support > linking. I think you can do it without this. > > On Fri, Feb 26, 2010 at 5:44 PM, Garrison Venn <gvenn.cfe.dev at gmail.com> wrote: >> Hey all, >> Attached you will find an experimental patch which allows me to play with a >> derived JIT class. With this patch >> I've alleviated my concerns with forcing cross module behavior for all users >> of JIT. However this...

...frame #3 is a compilation > of __l_personality() and frame #14 is a compilation of f(). The > compilation of __l_personality appears to have been triggered by the > need to output DWARF information for f(). > > -- James > > [snip] > > On 22/01/2010, Garrison Venn <gvenn.cfe.dev at gmail.com> wrote: >> Interesting. Was this the reason you were getting the recursive compilation >> error in JIT::runJITOnFunctionUnlocked(...) (isAlreadyCodeGenerating)? >> Do you have the time to try your test with 2.7? >> >> Garrison >> [snip]

...Yasskin wrote: > [sidenote: Please try to avoid extraneous whitespace and line wrapping changes in your patches. It makes it harder to see what you're actually changing] Sorry just saw some preexisting code was not in 80 columns. > > On Fri, Feb 26, 2010 at 4:57 AM, Garrison Venn <gvenn.cfe.dev at gmail.com> wrote: > Hi Olivier, > > On Feb 25, 2010, at 14:10, Olivier Meurant wrote: > >> Hi Garrison, >> >> I finally come back from holidays and take time to watch your patch. >> >> I must say that I largely prefer this version over the...

2010/1/11 Garrison Venn <gvenn.cfe.dev at gmail.com> > I have not tried this, but a linkage type of PrivateLinkage would not add > to the symbol table according > to the doc. > > LLVMSetLinkage(g, LLVMPrivateLinkage); > Thanks - I hadn't thought of that. > > Garrison > > On Jan 11, 2010, a...

Hey all, Attached you will find an experimental patch which allows me to play with a derived JIT class. With this patch I've alleviated my concerns with forcing cross module behavior for all users of JIT. However this introduces some new semantics, and kind of circumvents the EngineBuilder API. More important though, I have not addressed any concern about using stub functions in eager

Unfortunately, the current gdb support doesn't include line numbers. It'll tell you what function it crashed in and the stack trace though. Line numbers will probably come when the llvm-mc project is merged into the JIT. On Tue, Feb 9, 2010 at 9:37 AM, Garrison Venn <gvenn.cfe.dev at gmail.com> wrote: > Are you running this in a JIT? If so this will help: http://llvm.org/docs/DebuggingJITedCode.html. > > Garrison > > On Feb 9, 2010, at 10:33, Sebastian Schlunke wrote: > >> Hello, >> >> is there any way to debug a program in LLVM...

...asoftware.de/~kamm/projects/index.php/2008/08/19/exception-handling-in-llvmdc-using-llvm/ for real world implementations. There are many others, as can be seen in the LLVM project page. Garrison On Jan 8, 2010, at 20:06, OvermindDL1 wrote: > On Fri, Jan 8, 2010 at 12:12 PM, Garrison Venn <gvenn.cfe.dev at gmail.com> wrote: >> I just added an exception example to the wiki intended to be run in a JIT environment. Although this information is heavily date dependent, >> as the LLVM exception subsystem will be modified as time goes on, I could have used such an example when I wa...

..., I hope to learn about them from this list, and most likely from your postings. I know it is a common approach, but to me I think bitcode generation to JIT runtime is a a cool feature of LLVM. Garrison On Jan 22, 2010, at 12:08, James Williams wrote: > > > 2010/1/22 Garrison Venn <gvenn.cfe.dev at gmail.com> > Hi James, > > Note that the wiki example is a manual JIT example that works directly with the C++ APIs. As you know, no LLVM tools are used, > just LLVM libraries. I say this to point out, that in the example, the exception mechanism is under the complete co...

...w away use case (if I understand your use correctly). One should test this of course, and/or one of the experts could chime in hint hint. :-) Anyway thought this info. might be useful, however rehashed. Garrison On Jan 11, 2010, at 16:34, James Williams wrote: > 2010/1/11 Garrison Venn <gvenn.cfe.dev at gmail.com> > I have not tried this, but a linkage type of PrivateLinkage would not add to the symbol table according > to the doc. > > LLVMSetLinkage(g, LLVMPrivateLinkage); > > Thanks - I hadn't thought of that. > > Garrison > > On Jan 11, 2010,...

2010/1/22 Garrison Venn <gvenn.cfe.dev at gmail.com> > Hi James, > > Note that the wiki example is a manual JIT example that works directly with > the C++ APIs. As you know, no LLVM tools are used, > just LLVM libraries. I say this to point out, that in the example, the > exception mechanism is under the co...

On Sat, Feb 27, 2010 at 2:25 AM, Garrison Venn <gvenn.cfe.dev at gmail.com> wrote: > No problem I'll drop this from our discussion as it really is only germane to my > learning path and imagination. :-) I do at this time still have this concern of > allowing a user (developer) the right to turn this "cross module linkage" off...

...that unwind from, through, and to without using this attribute. Does this have meaning for certain platforms and thus must always be used "just in case"? Thanks in advance Garrison On Jul 23, 2011, at 12:47, Eli Friedman wrote: > On Sat, Jul 23, 2011 at 2:36 AM, Garrison Venn <gvenn.cfe.dev at gmail.com> wrote: >> Hi Bill, >> >> Thanks for working on this. >> >> Is there a reference for the function attribute uwtable, or is it to be defined as >> part of this effort? > > It already exists; there's some limited documentation i...

On Mon, Jul 25, 2011 at 10:50 AM, Garrison Venn <gvenn.cfe.dev at gmail.com> wrote: > Several people on this list have reported issues with the linker regarding a > named StructType instance with the same name in two different modules > being resolved into two StructTypes with different names due to StructType:: > setName(…) collision be...

...used for cases where a pass want to take advantage of (or fix up) info only *if* it is available. If you prepare a patch to fix getAnalysisifAvailable<>() uses (e.g. DwarfWriter requests you mention below) then I'll apply it. - Devang On Tue, Dec 8, 2009 at 11:11 AM, Garrison Venn <gvenn.cfe.dev at gmail.com> wrote: > Is it consistent to have a Pass instance's run method's implementation use getAnalysisIfAvailable<AnalysisType>() (vs just using getAnalysis< AnalysisType >) when that same instance's getAnalysisUsage(AnalysisUsage &au) implementation...