search for: lauro

Hi all, I did a performance test of two real applications (FFMPEG and GTK) on ARM. For more details see: http://laurovenancio.wordpress.com/2007/08/07/llvm-perf-tests/ Lauro

Adds external weak symbols of constant pool to ExtWeakSymbols set. Lauro -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/attachments/20061220/1aaa0c7b/attachment.html> -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: llvm.patch Type: text/x-patch Size: 1021...

without tabs Lauro 2006/12/20, Bill Wendling <isanbard at gmail.com>: > > Hi Lauro, > > Just a stylistic remark; In your "llvm.patch" file, there are tabs in > these lines: > > + if (GV->hasExternalWeakLinkage()) { > + ExtWeakSymbols.insert(GV); > + }...

Hi Lauro, Just a stylistic remark; In your "llvm.patch" file, there are tabs in these lines: + if (GV->hasExternalWeakLinkage()) { + ExtWeakSymbols.insert(GV); + } Others will need to review the patch for correctness, though. -bw On 12/20/06, Lauro Ramos Venancio <lauro.venancio at gm...

Hi Lauro, On 14 Aug 2007, at 01:10, Lauro Ramos Venancio wrote: > Hi all, > > I did a performance test of two real applications (FFMPEG and GTK) on > ARM. For more details see: > http://laurovenancio.wordpress.com/2007/08/07/llvm-perf-tests/ Could you give me some more information about th...

I think, we must move function arguments lowering from frontend to LLVM core. This lowering is generating machine dependent bytecode. See http://llvm.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=1230 Lauro 2007/2/26, Chris Lattner <sabre at nondot.org>: > On Mon, 26 Feb 2007, Lauro Ramos Venancio wrote: > > The problem is: llvm-gcc generates the same bytecode for both functions: > > > > declare void @f(i32, i64) > > declare void @g(i32, i64) > > > > I can...

...}; void f(int a, struct ss b); r0 <- a r1-r2 <- b void g(int a, long long b); r0 <- a r2-r3 <- b The problem is: llvm-gcc generates the same bytecode for both functions: declare void @f(i32, i64) declare void @g(i32, i64) I can't differ an i64 argument from a struct argument. Lauro

Rafael, Remember that the qemu <= 0.9.0 can misexecute code compiled by LLVM. I think you should test using qemu CVS. Lauro 2007/11/2, Rafael Espindola <espindola at google.com>: > Hello, > > I am trying to bootstrap on ARM linux EABI using a qemu chroot to > better test my changes on at least one more architecture. > > I am using the following configure line: > > ../gcc/configure --prefix...

Hi Arvind, To use llvm inside scratchbox you must use a newer qemu. See http://setanta.wordpress.com/2007/11/20/qemu-arm-eabi-no-scratchbox/ (in Portuguese, but the important things are in bash :) ) I don't know if it is the problem in this case, but it should be the first attempt. Lauro 2008/1/21, Rafael Espindola <espindola at google.com>: > On 21/01/2008, Arvind Ayyangar <arvind.ayyangar at gmail.com> wrote: > > Hi, > > I am new to LLVM and have been trying to get it working on > > scratchbox (ARM target). When I try to build llvm-2.1,...

Hi Lauro, On Wed, 2007-04-11 at 15:15 -0300, Lauro Ramos Venancio wrote: > For everyone understand which code must be emitted to implement TLS, I > will paste the code generated by gcc for a simple function: ... snip ... This proposal sounds really good to me. I only have a couple comments. We ha...

...h. > If I override these functions, I would copy a lot of code and change only few lines. I found another solution: adding two items to arguments Flags. Flags[27:24] = number of pieces that an argument was expanded. Flags[31:28] = sequential piece ID. What do you think? May I add these items? Lauro

...inux-gnu 4. implement "general dynamic" tls model for arm-linux-gnueabi (this is more complex because gcc 4.0 doesn't support tls for arm. I will have to backport a patch from gcc 4.1 to llvm-gcc) 5. Maybe implement other models for arm-linux-gnueabi Suggestions are appreciated. :-) Lauro

...out functions. A C test and the code generated by LLVM and GCC are attached. As you can see in the following error the ldr is too far from constant: $ arm-linux-gnueabi-as teste-llvm.s teste-llvm.s: Assembler messages: teste-llvm.s:1039: Error: bad immediate value for offset (4120) Any ideas? Lauro -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/attachments/20070105/ab5fee94/attachment.html> -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: teste.c Type: text/x-csrc Size: 20551 by...

...!) - If your host system libraries are newer then gcc 4.0, you must configure llvm-gcc with "--disable-shared" (this is a workaround for a bug) It would be great to have llvm-gcc inside OpenEmbedded. The Mamona project could be the first Linux distribution totally compiled by llvm-gcc! Lauro 2007/4/1, Koen Kooi <koen at dominion.kabel.utwente.nl>: > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- > Hash: SHA1 > > Anton Korobeynikov schreef: > > Hello, Koen. > > > >> So my question is: How should I build llvm and llvm-gcc4 to have it cross-compile from x86 &gt...

dovecot 1.2.9 --- I wanna know how the vacation script works. I don't understand why it tries to find locally (using LDAP) a recipient for the "vacation notification email". On the log, "sender_email at gmail.com" is the person sending email to "lauro at my.domain.org", which is on vacation. Deliver tries to find locally "sender_email at gmail.com", to send the vacation notification message: ---- imap dovecot: deliver(lauro at my.domain.org): sieve: msgid=<AANLkTim2HNbM=7WNoMOySg3UXgrikGnVdXR+wjhOG7 at mail.gmail.com&g...

...must apply the > > patch: > > http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/pipermail/llvm-commits/Week-of-Mon-20070319/046070.html > > That doesn't apply anymore :( You must use the llvm-gcc4 from the svn. It has some bug fixes that are important to ARM EABI and the patch should apply cleanly. Lauro

...0.42. Everything goes fine until llvm-gcc tries to compile the glibc. llvm-gcc can't compile glibc because it doesn't support TLS (Thread Local Storage). I know there is a bug report about TLS (PR941). Is there someone implementing TLS in LLVM and llvm-gcc? If not, I will implement this. Lauro

Hi Lauro, This is a very tricky problem to resolve. Basically you need a pass just before code emission to find the proper locations for each constant pool. That means you need: 1. Exact size of each instruction. This can be added with a custom instrinfo that specify instruction length for each targ...

...i64 registers). The function TargetLowering::LowerCallTo transforms all i64 arguments in two i32 arguments. A possible solution is override TargetLowering::LowerCallTo and do not expand i64 arguments. I don't know if it's a good solution. None backend overrides this function. Any ideas? Lauro

...th this issue, no? You just need a little extra bookkeeping in the target lowering code. Alternatively, you can use a "original alignment" attribute (i.e. alignment of unexpanded argument). That would be a 5-bit attribute. Chris, got a better idea? Evan On Feb 9, 2007, at 1:57 PM, Lauro Ramos Venancio wrote: >> >> Yes, you need to override both LowerArguments and LowerCallTo. All of >> the current targets / abi's use the default implementation in >> SelectionDAGISel.cpp But I guess ARM EABI will be the first. :-) As >> far as I can see, this is t...