search for: objcode

...;t this mean the ELF/COFF interfaces should be at the same level? I'm looking at the X86/X86CodeEmitter.cpp file and the various methods for emitting instructions/blocks/addresses/etc. Shouldn't the ELF/COFF interfaces be somewhat similar? 5. I have libELF building under LLVM. Its in lib/ObjCode/ELF (new). Should I commit it? Reid. -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 189 bytes Desc: This is a digitally signed message part URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/attachments/200506...

...Bijlani <ashish.bijlani at gmail.com> wrote: > Hi, > > I'm trying to compile linux-2.6.23.16 with llvm-2.3. Is it at all > possible? Yes, but it requires significant hacking, and the result for 2.6 is a mostly bitcode kernel with a few userspace shared libraries linked in as objcode (yes, the kernel builds .so files and includes them in the binary). There are a few changes here and there you can make to the kernel code to produce significantly nicer bitcodes too (e.g. rather than having module level asm that makes symbols weak, you can just have gcc do it). The modification...

...er the target is 32- or 64-bit), anything more complex should be exposed as virtual methods that are overloaded. The ELF spec makes it very clear what parts of the file format are common across targets and what the variations are caused by. > 5. I have libELF building under LLVM. Its in lib/ObjCode/ELF (new). > Should I commit it? What does it do, how is it structured? Can you email out the interface for feedback? I would suggest lib/CodeGen/ELFWriter or something similar, since it is effectively a part of the target-independent code generator. -Chris -- http://nondot.org/sabre/ ht...

...l.com> wrote: >> Hi, >> >> I'm trying to compile linux-2.6.23.16 with llvm-2.3. Is it at all >> possible? > > Yes, but it requires significant hacking, and the result for 2.6 is a > mostly bitcode kernel with a few userspace shared libraries linked in > as objcode (yes, the kernel builds .so files and includes them in the > binary). There are a few changes here and there you can make to the > kernel code to produce significantly nicer bitcodes too (e.g. rather > than having module level asm that makes symbols weak, you can just > have gcc do it...

Hi, I'm trying to compile linux-2.6.23.16 with llvm-2.3. Is it at all possible? I get "Not an ELF" error. I pass "-emit-llvm" option to spit LLVM IR, which can be JITed at runtime $ make CROSS_COMPILE=llvm- CFLAGS="-O2 -emit-llvm" Error: not ELF make[2]: *** [scripts/mod/elfconfig.h] Error 1 make[1]: *** [scripts/mod] Error 2 make: *** [scripts] Error 2 using

..., >>> >>> I'm trying to compile linux-2.6.23.16 with llvm-2.3. Is it at all >>> possible? >> >> Yes, but it requires significant hacking, and the result for 2.6 is a >> mostly bitcode kernel with a few userspace shared libraries linked in >> as objcode (yes, the kernel builds .so files and includes them in the >> binary). There are a few changes here and there you can make to the >> kernel code to produce significantly nicer bitcodes too (e.g. rather >> than having module level asm that makes symbols weak, you can just >&gt...

...gt;> I'm trying to compile linux-2.6.23.16 with llvm-2.3. Is it at all >>>> possible? >>> >>> Yes, but it requires significant hacking, and the result for 2.6 is a >>> mostly bitcode kernel with a few userspace shared libraries linked in >>> as objcode (yes, the kernel builds .so files and includes them in the >>> binary). There are a few changes here and there you can make to the >>> kernel code to produce significantly nicer bitcodes too (e.g. rather >>> than having module level asm that makes symbols weak, you can...