Displaying 20 results from an estimated 88 matches for "lowerinvokable".
2014 Mar 08
2
[LLVMdev] Is LowerInvoke's "-enable-correct-eh-support" option unused?
On 6 March 2014 18:09, Mark Seaborn <mseaborn at chromium.org> wrote:
> LowerAtomic "lowers atomic intrinsics to non-atomic form for use in a
> known non-preemptible environment". LowerInvoke strips out exception
> handling by converting invokes to calls, so that landingpads, resumes, etc.
> become dead and can be removed by a later pass.
>
> (As an aside,
2009 Apr 21
6
[LLVMdev] ARM and lowerinvoke
All,
I'm looking at the lowerinvoke pass as a starting point for getting
SJLJ based exception handling working on ARM, but am having some
troubles with it. When I run a simple testcase (attached) through llc
and specify -enable-correct-eh-support, llc asserts on me. It appears
there's been some bitrot somewhere. SelectDAGBuild and
SelectionDAGISel cooperate to track landing pads
2009 Apr 22
0
[LLVMdev] ARM and lowerinvoke
Hi Jim,
> I'm looking at the lowerinvoke pass as a starting point for getting
> SJLJ based exception handling working on ARM, but am having some
> troubles with it. When I run a simple testcase (attached) through llc
> and specify -enable-correct-eh-support, llc asserts on me. It appears
> there's been some bitrot somewhere. SelectDAGBuild and
>
2005 May 13
0
[LLVMdev] LongTy in LowerInvoke.cpp
On Fri, 13 May 2005, Markus F.X.J. Oberhumer wrote:
>> Ah ok, in that case, the CBE should be fixed. There are other cases that
>> could cause long arguments to exist on 32-bit systems. If the C compiler
>> takes issue with this, it would be best to tell the CBE to emit casts to C
>> (long) or something.
>
> Actually that's the only case I stumbled over this
2009 Apr 21
0
[LLVMdev] ARM and lowerinvoke
On Apr 21, 2009, at 1:53 PM, Jim Grosbach wrote:
> All,
>
> I'm looking at the lowerinvoke pass as a starting point for getting
> SJLJ based exception handling working on ARM, but am having some
> troubles with it. When I run a simple testcase (attached) through
> llc and specify -enable-correct-eh-support, llc asserts on me. It
> appears there's been some
2005 May 13
0
[LLVMdev] LongTy in LowerInvoke.cpp
On Fri, 13 May 2005, Markus F.X.J. Oberhumer wrote:
> There is still one unneeded LongTy in LowerInvoke.cpp - something like this
> pseudo-diff should probably get applied.
What does this impact?
-Chris
> Index: LowerInvoke.cpp
> ===================================================================
> RCS file: /var/cvs/llvm/llvm/lib/Transforms/Scalar/LowerInvoke.cpp,v
>
2005 May 13
0
[LLVMdev] LongTy in LowerInvoke.cpp
On Fri, 13 May 2005, Markus F.X.J. Oberhumer wrote:
> Chris Lattner wrote:
>> On Fri, 13 May 2005, Markus F.X.J. Oberhumer wrote:
>>
>>> There is still one unneeded LongTy in LowerInvoke.cpp - something like
>>> this pseudo-diff should probably get applied.
>>
>>
>> What does this impact?
>
> This causes code like
>
> write(2,
2004 Nov 11
1
[LLVMdev] Leaking GlobalVariable from lowerInvoke pass
Although most of the leaks I detected in LLVM were from singleton
objects, there also seem to be some real leaks. One such leak (which is
creating problems for me when I try to get rid of the constant
singletons) seems to be a GlobalVariable created on line 145 of
Transforms/Scalar/lowerInvoke.cpp -- any suggestions how I can make sure
this GlobalVariable gets deleted?
Actually I'm a bit
2012 Oct 10
1
[LLVMdev] [llvm-commits] [patch] "TargetTransform" as an API between codegen and IR-level passes
The functions that I placed in ScalarTargetTransformInfo are functions what were used by LSR and LowerInvoke. getJumpSize and getJumpAlignment are used by LowerInvoke. Do you suggest that I remove them from TargetLowering and keep them in ScalarTargetTransformInfo ?
Thanks,
Nadav
On Oct 9, 2012, at 5:47 PM, Evan Cheng <evan.cheng at apple.com> wrote:
> Hi Nadav,
>
> The
2008 Dec 26
1
[LLVMdev] Unwinds gone missing
Alastair Lynn wrote:
>
> From what I understand, the unwind instruction is implemented only
> for the interpreter: there is a -lowerunwind pass for compiling to
> other systems which will either lower unwind and invoke to setjmp/
> longjmp (slow) or turn invokes into calls and unwinds into abort()s.
>
Ah cheers, Alastair. That could be very useful (at least for me
2009 Apr 21
0
[LLVMdev] ARM and lowerinvoke
Hello, Jim
> -enable-correct-eh-support, llc asserts on me. It appears there's been some
> bitrot somewhere.
Well, correct. Because many places expects exceptions to be dwarf-style.
> Is it reasonable to expect that lowerinvoke is a good place to start for
> doing what I'm after?
I really don't think so. Since you're trying to map dwarf-based
structures into sjlj
2005 May 13
1
[LLVMdev] LongTy in LowerInvoke.cpp
On Fri, 2005-05-13 at 08:06 +0200, Markus F.X.J. Oberhumer wrote:
> Actually that's the only case I stumbled over this problem in a somewhat
> larger C++ program, and it's clearly the wrong type in LowerInvoke.cpp -
> it really should be IntPtrTy. But maybe we could use just IntTy here to
> avoid target dependencies.
Wait a minute. You want to lower a 64 bit thing to a 32
2010 Aug 13
4
[LLVMdev] errors when compiling with visual studio 10
im compiling llvm with visual studio 10. I have used cmake build app.
visual studio 10 is complaining about error c2039: 'setjmp' : is not a
member of llvm::Intrinsic
its line 154, LowerInvoke.cpp
any ideas?
--
View this message in context: http://old.nabble.com/errors-when-compiling-with-visual-studio-10-tp29427176p29427176.html
Sent from the LLVM - Dev mailing list archive at
2007 Dec 20
0
[LLVMdev] Whither exceptions
Hi Dale,
> Chris would like to turn on -enable-eh rather than -enable-correct-eh-
> support in the llvm testsuite for those targets that support it. The
> following patch is intended to turn it on for x86 and ppc. Anton,
> Duncan, are you OK with this?
yes, though see below.
> Chris would also like to discuss renaming the EH command line
> options, and I have to agree
2007 Dec 20
2
[LLVMdev] Whither exceptions
Chris would like to turn on -enable-eh rather than -enable-correct-eh-
support in the llvm testsuite for those targets that support it. The
following patch is intended to turn it on for x86 and ppc. Anton,
Duncan, are you OK with this?
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: mf.patch
Type: application/octet-stream
Size: 669 bytes
Desc: not
2009 Jul 20
4
[LLVMdev] x86 unwind support[MESSAGE NOT SCANNED]
> probably there should be a switch to choose whether codegen should turn
> unwind/invoke into dwarf or setjmp/longjmp style code.
There is, but it happens before codegen and is slow.
-enable-correct-eh-support will translate invoke/unwind into
setjmp/longjmp pairs for the correct behavior. See:
http://llvm.org/docs/Passes.html#lowerinvoke
Nick
>
> Ciao,
>
> Duncan.
>
2010 Aug 13
0
[LLVMdev] errors when compiling with visual studio 10
also within visual studio, when i compile a window pops up saying that CMake
has regenerated 29.sln files. and do i want to reload them? is this normal.
what should I do?
gafferuk wrote:
>
> im compiling llvm with visual studio 10. I have used cmake build app.
>
> visual studio 10 is complaining about error c2039: 'setjmp' : is not a
> member of llvm::Intrinsic
> its
2018 Mar 16
0
lld/lto/win32 crash on DIE code
Hello Carlo,
I tried your reproducer and faced different problem from one you described
(I'm using MacOS Sierra and lld built from trunk on Mar, 15). The crash happens
when SelectionDAGBuilder::lowerInvokable tries to access EH info of this function:
ms_t26_RemObjects_d_Elements_d_EUnit_d_Runnerb_RunChildrennt2a_RemObjects_d_Elements_d_EUnit_d_RunContext
This happens because LLVM doesn't know your personality function (@_elements_exception_handler), so I suggest looking
at llvm::classifyEHPersonal...
2008 Dec 26
0
[LLVMdev] Unwinds gone missing
From what I understand, the unwind instruction is implemented only
for the interpreter: there is a -lowerunwind pass for compiling to
other systems which will either lower unwind and invoke to setjmp/
longjmp (slow) or turn invokes into calls and unwinds into abort()s.
On 26 Dec 2008, at 15:19, Matt Giuca wrote:
>
>
> Jon Harrop wrote:
>>
>> Is it? I was just reading
2012 Oct 25
0
[LLVMdev] TargetData class?
Here is my patch for it:
Index: ReleaseNotes.html
===================================================================
--- ReleaseNotes.html (revision 166627)
+++ ReleaseNotes.html (working copy)
@@ -669,6 +669,9 @@
"TargetTransformInfo" provides a number of low-level interfaces.
LSR and LowerInvoke already use the new interface. </p>
+<p> The TargetData structure