search for: majumdar

On 11 July 2015 at 13:14, Caldarale, Charles R <Chuck.Caldarale at unisys.com> wrote: >> From: llvmdev-bounces at cs.uiuc.edu [mailto:llvmdev-bounces at cs.uiuc.edu] >> On Behalf Of Dibyendu Majumdar >> Subject: [LLVMdev] JIT compilation 2-3 times slower in latest LLVM snapshot > >> I updated my clone of the LLVM github mirror today and I am finding >> that the JIT compilation is now 2-3 times slower. The last time I >> refreshed was maybe 2 weeks ago. Is there a know...

...nce has been opposite, compile times improved for my compiler in the past month. So I'm inclined to understand what your codegen path is doing to see if there's some pathological case you may be hitting (which I'd like to avoid for my case :-)) On Sat, Jul 11, 2015 at 5:50 AM, Dibyendu Majumdar <mobile at majumdar.org.uk> wrote: > On 11 July 2015 at 13:16, Dibyendu Majumdar <mobile at majumdar.org.uk> wrote: >> On 11 July 2015 at 13:14, Caldarale, Charles R >> <Chuck.Caldarale at unisys.com> wrote: >>>> From: llvmdev-bounces at cs.uiuc.edu [mai...

...I would recommend replacing > > cantFail(callToFailingFunc(...)); > > with > > logAllUnhandledErrors(callToFailingFunc(...), errs(), "callToFailingFunc(...) failed:"); > Okay thank you - I will do that and report back. > On Mon, Apr 13, 2020 at 10:06 AM Dibyendu Majumdar <mobile at majumdar.org.uk> wrote: >> >> Hi, >> >> I updated my project to LLVM 10.0 today and I am getting JIT symbol >> resolution errors. >> I could not find any example or updated tutorial or documentation that >> describes the new api - as all do...

Hi Lang, On Tue, 13 Aug 2019 at 23:26, Lang Hames <lhames at gmail.com> wrote: >> I also get this message: >> JIT session error: Symbols not found: { raise_error } > > > Ahh -- I see the problem. The DynamicLibrarySearchGenerator is using the getAddressOfSymbol method, which (under the hood) is basically issuing an appropriate dlsym lookup, and that does not find

Hi Don, On 25 September 2017 at 22:37, Don Hinton <hintonda at gmail.com> wrote: > It'll work in release builds -- just rebuild llvm with LLVM_ENABLE_DUMP > enabled. > That assumes one has control over the LLVM build options. > On Mon, Sep 25, 2017 at 2:35 PM, Dibyendu Majumdar <mobile at majumdar.org.uk> > wrote: >> >> On 25 September 2017 at 22:29, Don Hinton <hintonda at gmail.com> wrote: >> > Thanks for reporting this. >> > >> > Looks like this one was missed -- the declaration should have been >> > #ifdef...

...uld you please send me your unoptimized and expected optimized code? The default implementation only contains some transformations. It would be helpful to know what you are actually trying. > Optimize Module is just a function object. > You can view the code here: https://github.com/dibyendumajumdar/ravi/blob/master/include/ravi_llvmcodegen.h https://github.com/dibyendumajumdar/ravi/blob/master/src/ravi_llvmjit.cpp Just look for USE_ORCv2_JIT The code is messy but that is because LLVM's api keeps changing from version to version, causing huge issues for users. > > On Sat, 10 Aug...

Hi Lang, On Tue, 13 Aug 2019 at 22:03, Lang Hames <lhames at gmail.com> wrote: > When you say your code is not getting optimized, do you mean that IR optimizations are not being applied, or that codegen optimizations are not being applied? > > What do you see if you dump the modules before/after running the pass manager on them, like this: > > dbgs() << "Before

Hi, I am using the LLVM release_37 branch and have a strange issue. Please see the two IR outputs I have saved below: https://github.com/dibyendumajumdar/ravi/tree/master/ravi-tests/comp_issue The original.ll is the code I am generating. The aftercompiling.ll is the output from LLVM with opt level 0. The issue is that LLVM is deciding to remove the blocks with labels updatei and updatei.64 (lines 433 and 454 in original.ll) for some reason that I...

On Tue, Mar 31, 2015 at 3:31 PM, Dibyendu Majumdar <mobile at majumdar.org.uk> wrote: > Hi, > > I constructed a minimal Lua program that reproduces the problem. > Essentially the problem occurs if a JITed function is recursively > called - and there is a longjmp from the inner call. Example: > > function rais(n) > i...

...derr by default) and return a derived error (e.g. failure-to-materialize) to callers. I believe you're seeing the logged error, and you will see a failure-to-materialize error if you log the result that reaches cantFail in your example above. -- Lang. On Mon, Apr 13, 2020 at 1:18 PM Dibyendu Majumdar <mobile at majumdar.org.uk> wrote: > Hi Lang, > > > > > Can you share the specific errors that you're getting back? I would > recommend replacing > > > > > > cantFail(callToFailingFunc(...)); > > > > > > with > > > > &g...

Or, instead of lobbying for llvm to always define dump(), you could lobby for it to enabled by default. On Mon, Sep 25, 2017 at 2:41 PM, Dibyendu Majumdar <mobile at majumdar.org.uk> wrote: > Hi Don, > > On 25 September 2017 at 22:37, Don Hinton <hintonda at gmail.com> wrote: > > It'll work in release builds -- just rebuild llvm with LLVM_ENABLE_DUMP > > enabled. > > > > That assumes one has control o...

...a null implementation at the very least. In my out-of-tree target, I also removed them from the interface if the build was for Release to ensure that I got compile-time errors to reveal other places I might have otherwise missed. All the best, MartinO -----Original Message----- From: Dibyendu Majumdar [mailto:mobile at majumdar.org.uk] Sent: 25 September 2017 20:57 To: Martin J. O'Riordan <MartinO at theheart.ie> Cc: LLVM Developers <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> Subject: Re: [llvm-dev] Errors linking with LLVM 5.0 - dump() missing Hi Martin, On 25 September 2017 at 20:35, Mart...

Hi I updated my clone of the LLVM github mirror today and I am finding that the JIT compilation is now 2-3 times slower. The last time I refreshed was maybe 2 weeks ago. Is there a known change that would explain this? This is on Windows 8.1 64-bit. I am using MCJIT. Thanks and Regards Dibyendu

...ug build status of the client, but how LLVM 5.0 was originally compiled. So the guards you have put are not really going to work (that is my finding anyway). Regards Dibyendu > > -----Original Message----- > From: llvm-dev [mailto:llvm-dev-bounces at lists.llvm.org] On Behalf Of Dibyendu Majumdar via llvm-dev > Sent: 25 September 2017 19:41 > To: llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org > Subject: [llvm-dev] Errors linking with LLVM 5.0 - dump() missing > > Hi, > > I am finding that my project that previously successfully built with versions 3.5 to 4.0 is now failing to link because...

Hi, On 22 September 2017 at 15:33, Dibyendu Majumdar <mobile at majumdar.org.uk> wrote: > I am looking to port my MCJIT based implementation to ORC. I have been > reading up on the ORC tutorials, but am not clear on how to do > following: > > I would like to discard everything other than the compiled code after > compiling a m...

...I never had to until now build a debug build of LLVM. As I mentioned the real problem is that the client has no way of knowing how LLVM was built - as there is no #define to flag the missing dump() implementation either. Regards Dibyendu > > -----Original Message----- > From: Dibyendu Majumdar [mailto:mobile at majumdar.org.uk] > Sent: 25 September 2017 20:57 > To: Martin J. O'Riordan <MartinO at theheart.ie> > Cc: LLVM Developers <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> > Subject: Re: [llvm-dev] Errors linking with LLVM 5.0 - dump() missing > > Hi Martin, > >...

It'll work in release builds -- just rebuild llvm with LLVM_ENABLE_DUMP enabled. On Mon, Sep 25, 2017 at 2:35 PM, Dibyendu Majumdar <mobile at majumdar.org.uk> wrote: > Hi Don, > > On 25 September 2017 at 22:29, Don Hinton <hintonda at gmail.com> wrote: > > Thanks for reporting this. > > > > Looks like this one was missed -- the declaration should have been > #ifdef'd > > awa...

Hi, I am encountering a problem that I do not know how to debug. I would greatly appreciate any guidance on this issue. On Windows when I run Lua test cases from JITed code I am getting following error: Unhandled exception at 0x00007FFCEEEAC500 (ntdll.dll) in lua.exe: 0xC0000028: An invalid or unaligned stack was encountered during an unwind operation. This is happening when the Lua code is

...) + 8) & 15) == 0); } Run this near where LLVM calls back into C code. If it fails, disassemble the calling LLVM function and look at that to see if there's something wrong with the prologue. Sending that along with any followups would be helpful. On Sat, Apr 25, 2015 at 3:07 PM, Dibyendu Majumdar <mobile at majumdar.org.uk> wrote: > I have an example test program (smallest I could construct) that > triggers the problem. The relevant line is commented in the code. > > > https://github.com/dibyendumajumdar/ravi/tree/master/ravi-tests/longjmp_issue > > I have also d...

Hi, I am looking to port my MCJIT based implementation to ORC. I have been reading up on the ORC tutorials, but am not clear on how to do following: I would like to discard everything other than the compiled code after compiling a module. A module may have more than one function in it - so I would like to retain all the compiled functions. I am okay with eager compilation - i.e. there is no need