search for: handleargment

...when necessary like this: LowerArguments(BasicBlock *LLVMBB) { // code for traditional target ........... for (Function::arg_iterator I = F.arg_begin(), E = F.arg_end(); I != E; ++I, ++Idx) { if (TLI.isStrangeTarget()) { //code for my strange target TLI.HandleArgment(...); continue; } // code for traditional target ....... } // code for traditional target ............. } thank you for any suggestion

I'm seeing a bunch of failures on AArch64 after updating this morning. These are NOT failing on x86-64. These all seem to be caused by segfaults (example backtrace below). Is anyone else seeing this? -David LLVM :: DebugInfo/symbolize-no-debug-str.test LLVM :: tools/gold/X86/comdat.ll LLVM :: tools/gold/X86/visibility.ll LLVM ::

Hi, I would like to start a new porting of GlobalIsel for RISCV. An initial patch about GlobalIsel infrastructure for RISCV was ready now: https://reviews.llvm.org/D65219 There is another porting patch https://reviews.llvm.org/D41653 posted by Leslie Zhai at the end of 2017. I have checked with Leslie about the status of this patch.He has stopped developing it since some questions need be

Hey everyone! Objcopy is a powerful tool that allows one to modify object files in various manners, for example, modify symbols / symbol tables or copy / remove particular parts of a binary. It also serves as a basis for the strip tool. Currently, llvm-objcopy only supports ELF files while binutils' objcopy can handle Mach-O files as well. Besides extending the existing tool to support Mach-O

For those of you out there using export/collect (which we really need to come up with a better name for...), can you test the current SVN code? I''m mostly wondering if the performance is any better. To use it, you''ll have to remove your current database, since the database schema is significantly changed. I''m getting what looks like an additional 25% reduction