search for: libjit

...sue: In http://llvm.org/devmtg/2008-08/Geoffray_VMKitProject.pdf it is on page 21: "VMKit, Mono, PNet", Array bounds checks. In http://hal.inria.fr/docs/00/35/45/77/PDF/RR-6799.pdf it is on page 17: "We compare N3 with Mono [9] version 1.2.6, and PNet version 0.7.4 [2], which uses libjit as dynamic compiler...." This statement is false. PNet version 0.7.4 has not been using LibJIT. It has been using an unroller. "The PNet performance show that libjit has very few optimizations and does not compete against robust compilers." In fact any amateur in Just-In-Time compi...

...equires some clarification. I won't say more than what's in this email. The VMKit paper dates from early 2008. It compares VMKit with pnet 0.7.4 and not the latest release (0.8.0) because we were not able to get any information to build it correctly at the time; the website that hosted libjit was broken, i.e. http://www.southern-storm.com.au. That said, here's the info that we have on the pnet website: > January 15-01-2006: DotGNU Portable.NET 0.7.4 and libjit 0.0.6 released! > > New versions of Portable.NET and libjit are available. Far too many > new features and bu...

Dear all, This new version of the paper at: http://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/docs/00/36/53/37/PDF/RR-6799.pdf got ride of libJIT. Now my question is the how scientific is this research and research paper if instead of using libJIT and Portable.NET JIT: authors of "VMKit: a Substrate for Virtual Machines by Nicolas Geoffray — Gaël Thomas— Charles Clément —Bertil Folliot — Gilles Muller" simply decided to decided rem...

>>>>> "Chris" == Chris Lattner <sabre at nondot.org> writes: >> FWIW I actually did this work twice, once for libjit and once for >> LLVM. I'm happy to provide a comparison, from a jit-writing >> perspective, if you're interested. Chris> Given your experience with both, I'd be very interested in any Chris> thoughts you have on how we can make LLVM better. :) libjit has a few advan...

...ray, Gaël Thomas, Charles Clément, Bertil Folliot, Gilles Muller and presentation done by Nicolas Geoffray on LLVM conference supported by Google: http://llvm.org/devmtg/2008-08/Geoffray_VMKitProject.pdf They provide comparison of their system that uses LLVM, with our system Portable.NET that uses LibJIT for Just-In-Time compilation. All measures in this paper have been done for Portable.NET 0.7.4, which does not use LibJIT as its engine. However, the author provides results of Portable.NET 0.7.4. as results of LibJIT. The Portable.NET 0.7.4 uses a dynamic compiler, which has nothing in common with...

...t. I've been thinking about having some kind of simple bridge between the LLVM and GCC worlds here -- very inefficient, but at least I could get it working rather quickly. Long term I'm hoping someone else will be solving this problem... :-) FWIW I actually did this work twice, once for libjit and once for LLVM. I'm happy to provide a comparison, from a jit-writing perspective, if you're interested. Thanks for writing LLVM. It is awesome to be able to add a JIT to libgcj this easily. Tom

...t least I could get it working rather quickly. Long term I'm hoping > someone else will be solving this problem... :-) If I had to speculate, I would guess that LLVM will support dwarf-2 style zero cost exceptions in the next 2-3 months. > FWIW I actually did this work twice, once for libjit and once for > LLVM. I'm happy to provide a comparison, from a jit-writing > perspective, if you're interested. Given your experience with both, I'd be very interested in any thoughts you have on how we can make LLVM better. :) > Thanks for writing LLVM. It is awesome to b...

...ment, Bertil Folliot, Gilles > Muller and presentation done by Nicolas Geoffray on LLVM conference > supported by Google: > http://llvm.org/devmtg/2008-08/Geoffray_VMKitProject.pdf > > They provide comparison of their system that uses LLVM, with our > system Portable.NET that uses LibJIT for Just-In-Time compilation. > All measures in this paper have been done for Portable.NET 0.7.4, > which does not use LibJIT as its engine. However, the author provides > results of Portable.NET 0.7.4. as results of LibJIT. The Portable.NET > 0.7.4 uses a dynamic compiler, which has no...

On Tue, 18 Apr 2006, Tom Tromey wrote: >>>>>> "Chris" == Chris Lattner <sabre at nondot.org> writes: >>> FWIW I actually did this work twice, once for libjit and once for >>> LLVM. I'm happy to provide a comparison, from a jit-writing >>> perspective, if you're interested. > > Chris> Given your experience with both, I'd be very interested in any > Chris> thoughts you have on how we can make LLVM better. :)...

...generate SSA form but instead uses alloca to allocate space for the stack and locals (and temporaries where needed) and then emits explicit loads and stores everywhere. On irc Chris showed me how to invoke the LLVM pass to turn this back into something sane :-) Jakob> What is the footprint of libjit compared to the more heavy LLVM Jakob> jit? How about recompiling in libjit? Has it support for CFG, Jakob> dataflow analysis? Oh, libjit is much smaller. I don't think it does much by way of optimization. libjit takes a very simple approach to recompilation. There is a function you c...

...working rather quickly. Long term I'm hoping > someone else will be solving this problem... :-) > I would offer some help. But as I have always told because of a lack of money supporting me, I have just my very scarce free time. > > FWIW I actually did this work twice, once for libjit and once for > LLVM. I'm happy to provide a comparison, from a jit-writing > perspective, if you're interested. Yes very much! How did you find writing it directly in SSA-form. What is the footprint of libjit compared to the more heavy LLVM jit? How about recompiling in libjit? Has...

Hi. I have more questions regarding llvm and using it as a jit for our purposes. Also, let me confess that I haven't actually used llvm yet (I'm still prototyping using gnu's libjit). Some of the issues that have come up from that work so far leads to me these questions: 1) We intend to use llvm as a jit in our expression compiler at compile-time only. At runtime, the x86 code generated from the bitcode compiler will be packed and sent to our runtime facility for executi...

On Tue, Mar 23, 2010 at 4:44 PM, Shasank Chavan <shanko_chavano at hotmail.com> wrote: > Hi.  I have more questions regarding llvm and using it as a jit for our > purposes.  Also, let me confess that I haven't actually used llvm yet (I'm > still prototyping using gnu's libjit).  Some of the issues that have come up > from that work so far leads to me these questions: > > 1) We intend to use llvm as a jit in our expression compiler at compile-time > only.  At runtime, the x86 code generated from the bitcode compiler will be > packed and sent to our runtime...

...010 at 4:44 PM, Shasank Chavan > <shanko_chavano at hotmail.com> wrote: > > Hi. I have more questions regarding llvm and using it as a jit for our > > purposes. Also, let me confess that I haven't actually used llvm yet (I'm > > still prototyping using gnu's libjit). Some of the issues that have come up > > from that work so far leads to me these questions: > > > > 1) We intend to use llvm as a jit in our expression compiler at compile-time > > only. At runtime, the x86 code generated from the bitcode compiler will be > > packe...

Hello So how did it happen that the only project which was a candidate for libJIT Summer of Code in GNU, with the same title got selected in LLVM? Does it mean that the same genius idea came to two minds? Thanks, Kirill -- http://code.google.com/p/libjit-linear-scan-register-allocator/

On Apr 20, 2009, at 12:42 PM, Kirill Kononenko wrote: > Dear all, > > > This new version of the paper at: > > http://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/docs/00/36/53/37/PDF/RR-6799.pdf > > got ride of libJIT. Now my question is the how scientific is this > research and research paper if instead of using libJIT and > Portable.NET JIT: > authors of "VMKit: a Substrate for Virtual Machines by Nicolas > Geoffray — Gaël Thomas— Charles Clément —Bertil Folliot — Gilles > Muller" simp...

...es gasey code > feeling..especially in the backend.. :)cheers! I have no idea what this is supposed to mean: "creates gasey code feeling..especially in the backend.." However, if there is serious interest, many people would like an easy to use C wrapper around the LLVM API's. libjit, for all its flaws, seems to have a pretty reasonable C api, one that would be trivial to implement with LLVM: http://www.southern-storm.com.au/doc/libjit/libjit_toc.html If someone wanted to write a libjit-compatible C interface, or something completely different, but similar in spirit, it wou...

I also suffer from the same C++ allergy notably shoot in foot with dynamic grammers and overloading.. creates gasey code feeling..especially in the backend.. :)cheers! Simon Burton <simon at arrowtheory.com> wrote: On Sat, 15 Apr 2006 07:47:00 +0200 Oscar Fuentes wrote: > > BTW, Simon, is there a reason for writing LLVM assembler and not > generating LLVM code directly? You

...010 at 4:44 PM, Shasank Chavan > <shanko_chavano at hotmail.com> wrote: > > Hi. I have more questions regarding llvm and using it as a jit for our > > purposes. Also, let me confess that I haven't actually used llvm yet (I'm > > still prototyping using gnu's libjit). Some of the issues that have come up > > from that work so far leads to me these questions: > > > > 1) We intend to use llvm as a jit in our expression compiler at compile-time > > only. At runtime, the x86 code generated from the bitcode compiler will be > > packe...

...>> <shanko_chavano at hotmail.com> wrote: >> > Hi.  I have more questions regarding llvm and using it as a jit for our >> > purposes.  Also, let me confess that I haven't actually used llvm yet >> > (I'm >> > still prototyping using gnu's libjit).  Some of the issues that have >> > come up >> > from that work so far leads to me these questions: >> > >> > 1) We intend to use llvm as a jit in our expression compiler at >> > compile-time >> > only.  At runtime, the x86 code generated from...