search for: interpretability

Hi, what would be needed to make a C/C++ interpreter using the LLVM libraries. We have in our project (http://root.cern.ch) a C/C++ interpreter (http://root.cern.ch/twiki/bin/view/ROOT/CINT), but it has some limitations (the biggest being maintenance). I see there is a libLLVMInterpreter that can interpret the LLVM IR. Could this be used to interpret, or a starting point, to an real

Has anyone looked at porting the llvm interpreter to an embedded system? I've been looking into how to portably run bytecode on a lightweight embedded processor and it seemed like interpreting llvm bytecode might be a solution. We would have to write the interpreter in c and it would have to fit in a few k of ram and a dozen or less k of code space, but I figured I'd ask to see if people

[I assume you meant to send this to the list as well, not just me.] Begin forwarded message: Date: Wed, 3 Nov 2010 14:43:54 +0000 From: Salomon Brys <salomon.brys at gmail.com> To: Török Edwin <edwintorok at gmail.com> Subject: Re: [LLVMdev] Forcing the Interpreter segfaults I have build LLVM in debug mode. Here are the informations of the segfault : memcpy() at 0x7ffff6f6581e

Xu Yang wrote: > Hi Nick: > > The first problem have been solved by calling llvm-ld: > > $ llvm-ld -o hellosin.llvm hellosin.bc -lm > $ lli -force-interpreter=true -load=/usr/lib/libm.so hellosin.llvm.bc > hello sin: 0.50 Only because the optimizer saw sin(constant) and folded it away. The entire program became 'print constant string'. There is certainly a bug

Hi everybody, I'm currently working with LLVM (v 2.6) and I try to interpret LLVM bitcode using the c API. Here is my problem : I have two LLVMModuleRef, M1 and M2, M1 contains the function "funct()" and M2 contains a main function which call "funct()" (M2 declares "funct()" too but it doesn't define it). If I try to run the main function, I got the error

Just a quick question on LLVM, signals, and the lli interpreter. A sample program is included at the end. Platform is x86, Linux, 32-bit, GCC 4.2.4. Does lli -force-interpreter support signals, or is it only the JIT that does? The following sample program crashes with lli 2.5 and lli top-of-tree. Thanks and regards, Matt ============================= #include <stdio.h> #include

Sam, Nick, thank you both for your reply--that was what I thought but wanted to check. The JIT compiler for x86 is pretty robust. Are you aware of any comprehensive list of the most "significant" functional differences between the interpreter and the JIT for x86, i.e. a TODO list? grep -I todo * ? I've just got a rather large project here (user-mode Linux) which works with the

On 08/11/2014 04:21 AM, David Chisnall wrote: > Hi Josh, > > On 9 Aug 2014, at 21:33, Josh Klontz <josh.klontz at gmail.com> wrote: > >> I'm facing a situation where I have generated IR that only needs to be executed once. I've noticed for simple IR it's faster to run the interpreter on it, but for complex IR it's much better to JIT compile and execute it.

Hello Matt, The interpreter doesn't support external functions at all. This includes the printf function from the glibc library. That's why the signal causes a segfault. If you're interested in bringing the interpreter up-to-date with the JIT compiler, I would welcome it since JIT compilation isn't supported on all platforms. --Sam ----- Original Message ---- > From:

> > Hey Lang - does any of this look familiar to you? I'm afraid not: I know nothing about the interpreter. As far as I'm aware it's essentially abandonware. Alberto: The usual recommendation in these circumstances is to use a JIT class instead of the interpreter. You're using -force-interpreter though, so I assume you really want to use the interpreter for your use case?

Dear Sir/Madam Our company, 4Js software, has developed an SQL data base software that runs under different operating systems: Windows, Linux, Mac OS X. This software compiles each SQL statement into a C program that is compiled "on the fly" and executed by our JIT, Just In Time compiler. We wanted to port it to Apple's iOS, and spent a lot of time retargetting the JIT for

Hi Nick: Thanks for the response. You are right about sinf. I changed the constant to sscanf(argv[1], ...), and it gave me back 0 again. I also compared the disassembled code, and saw it was indeed the case. The primary reason I use interpreter is because I wish to do runtime checking on memory access pattern in multithreaded C programs. for example, if thread one is in the critical section, I

It seems llvm interpreter only supports a limited number of external functions. fmod, in particular is not supported. any reason why it is not supported ? "lli -force-interpreter test.bc LLVM ERROR: Tried to execute an unknown external function: double (double, double)* fmod " -- Kind Regards Xin Tong -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL:

I have not used the C api or the interpreter, but via JIT one can use ExecutionEngine::addGlobalMapping(...) after the function decl in the foreign module. See if there is an equivalent in the C API, which will probably work for the interpreter given that this method is declared in ExecutionEngine. Also search for a previous email thread in this list. This discussion was fairly recent, and I

David, sorry for this email but I noticed I made a mistake in the previous one. So I managed to compile llvm Debug with asserts release. I have used the following commands: cmake -DLLVM_TARGETS_TO_BUILD=X86 -DLLVM_ENABLE_RTTI=ON -DLLVM_ENABLE_FFI=ON -DCMAKE_BUILD_TYPE=Debug -DLLVM_ENABLE_ASSERTIONS=ON .. cmake --build . -- -j8 && sudo cmake --build . --target install Once lli was

Hi Nick: Thanks for pointing me to libffi. Recompile LLVM with libffi does solve the problem of printf. But it still has other problems: 1) sinf() returns 0 in the interpreter, but returns correct value in JIT (see hellosin.c) 2) calling pthread_create cause lli to crash in the interpreter mode, but no problem in JIT (see phello.c). My questions are: i) can I call any arbitrary external function

Helps to send to list: On Tue, Nov 2, 2010 at 1:00 PM, OvermindDL1 <overminddl1 at gmail.com> wrote: > On Tue, Nov 2, 2010 at 12:51 PM, Salomon Brys <salomon.brys at gmail.com> wrote: >> Hi everyone ! >> I am very new to LLVM and intent to use it in a research project. >> I have a problem with the interpreter: I have a simple compiler that >> generates LLVM

My recent work on Compiz-scheme has brought to my attention several problems preventing a real compiz extension language. Note that when I refer to an extension language, I am not referring to the ability to add plugins in some other languages, but more of something in the vein of emacs lisp. The major problem right now is extension languages are locked in to one plugin and what core exposes.

Hi Salomon, please don't forget to reply to the list too (I've CC'd the list). > I don't think my code is doing anything worng... No, it looks fine to me, and the interpreter certainly supports this. That suggests that the value of %str is not being transmitted to the function right. If it is getting the wrong pointer value, that would explain why it barfs. Ciao, Duncan.

On Aug 31, 2009, at 1:19 PM, Renato Golin wrote: > 2009/8/31 Axel Naumann <Axel.Naumann at cern.ch>: >> we want to implement a C++ interpreter using LLVM and clang > > Isn't clang going on that direction anyway? Clang is meant to be flexible enough to be used as the basis for a C++ interpreter. However, there will probably be a bit of work to do in Clang to make