search for: msp_32bit

Without the MSP_32BIT part, I consistently hit this assertion: Assertion failed: ((Type == ELF::R_X86_64_32 && (Value <= UINT32_MAX)) || (Type == ELF::R_X86_64_32S && ((int64_t)Value <= INT32_MAX && (int64_t)Value >= INT32_MIN))), function resolveX86_64Relocation, file ../lib/ExecutionE...

Can you try it without the MAP_32BIT part? It won't be as reliable, but if the memory addresses it is asking for are available it could work. I agree that there are good reasons not to lock in on a single memory address, but I'm curious as to what other obstacles might be lurking behind the ones we know about. If the patch works when memory is loaded below 2GB then it would be possible

...--Original Message----- > From: Dr D. Chisnall [mailto:dc552 at hermes.cam.ac.uk] On Behalf Of David > Chisnall > Sent: Friday, May 10, 2013 11:06 AM > To: Kaylor, Andrew > Cc: LLVM Developers Mailing List > Subject: Re: TLS with MCJIT (an experimental patch) > > Without the MSP_32BIT part, I consistently hit this assertion: > > Assertion failed: ((Type == ELF::R_X86_64_32 && (Value <= UINT32_MAX)) || > (Type == ELF::R_X86_64_32S && ((int64_t)Value <= INT32_MAX && > (int64_t)Value >= INT32_MIN))), function resolveX86_64Relocation, fil...

...know what makes it happen. -Andy -----Original Message----- From: Dr D. Chisnall [mailto:dc552 at hermes.cam.ac.uk] On Behalf Of David Chisnall Sent: Friday, May 10, 2013 11:06 AM To: Kaylor, Andrew Cc: LLVM Developers Mailing List Subject: Re: TLS with MCJIT (an experimental patch) Without the MSP_32BIT part, I consistently hit this assertion: Assertion failed: ((Type == ELF::R_X86_64_32 && (Value <= UINT32_MAX)) || (Type == ELF::R_X86_64_32S && ((int64_t)Value <= INT32_MAX && (int64_t)Value >= INT32_MIN))), function resolveX86_64Relocation, file ../lib/ExecutionE...