search for: gvrequiresextraload

Hello, Nicolas. > This will force an indirect call, and won't use the jump-size limitation > of the bl instruction. I think we're using some logic to determine, whether call should be "direct" or "indirect" on x86. Look for GVRequiresExtraLoad() routine in the X86Subtarget.cpp -- With best regards, Anton Korobeynikov. Faculty of Mathematics & Mechanics, Saint Petersburg State University.

...should use extra load for direct calls to dllimported functions in // non-JIT mode. // it get's into here if ((IsTailCall || !Is64Bit || // both these are false getTargetMachine().getCodeModel() != CodeModel::Large) // this is false && !Subtarget->GVRequiresExtraLoad(G->getGlobal(), // this is short circuited away getTargetMachine(), true)) Callee = DAG.getTargetGlobalAddress(G->getGlobal(), getPointerTy()); // this is passed over because the test is false // since it made it through the if (Glob...

Hi, I was able to try this on linux again. Unfortunately it doesn't work at all (neither using runFunction nor a CallInst). It simply says function called get5 not known. Calling printf the same way works, though. On linux the function is exported as "get5" from the executable while it is called "_get5" on OS X. I could not spot any other differences.. any

On Feb 12, 2008, at 5:26 PM, Chuck Rose III wrote: > Hola LLVMers, > > I’m debugging through some strangeness that I’m seeing on X64 on > windows with LLVM2.2. I had to change the code so that it would > engage the x64 target machine on windows builds, but I’ve otherwise > left LLVM 2.2 alone. The basic idea is that I’ve got a function bar > which is compiled by

Hola LLVMers, I'm debugging through some strangeness that I'm seeing on X64 on windows with LLVM2.2. I had to change the code so that it would engage the x64 target machine on windows builds, but I've otherwise left LLVM 2.2 alone. The basic idea is that I've got a function bar which is compiled by VStudio and I'm creating another function foo via LLVM JIT which is going