Displaying 8 results from an estimated 8 matches for "objectstream".
Did you mean:
objectstreamer
2010 Oct 21
1
[LLVMdev] [llvm-commits] Fwd: Proof of concept patch for unifying the .s/ELF emission of .ARM.attributes
...ammer to do ballpeen
> work..... But when in Rome.... :-)
Hi Jason,
Are you printing ELF symbols and sections with AsmPrinter? I was under
the impression that you'd create an MCPrinter to deal with the
format-independent and only use AsmPrinter/ELFPrinter for specific
calls (to AsmStreamer/ObjectStreamer).
Or maybe I got it all wrong...
cheers,
--renato
2015 Jul 13
2
[LLVMdev] ARM Jump table pcrelative relaxation in clang / llc
Hi,
I have kept working on this and found the following (as llvm 3.5):
1) In the function MCObjectStreamer::EmitInstruction there is a check for
the instruction being relaxable or not:
if (!Assembler.getBackend().mayNeedRelaxation(Inst)) {
EmitInstToData(Inst, STI);
return;
}
At this stage, the instruction as been already selected to be ARM::ADR.
The call to mayNeed
2015-07-07 18:06 GMT+0...
2019 Nov 27
2
Writing a Pass in LLVM MC (Machine Code) level to Analyze Assembly Code
Hi All,
A self-follow up and rephrase of my previous question with updated subject:
What I want to do is to analyze hand-written assembly code with 'full
details' where semantics of each instruction can be known in LLVM passes.
Many of such instructions have no corresponding counterparts in IR/MIR
forms, such as 'syscall' 'iret', etc. At MC level, such assembly code can
2010 Jul 19
7
[LLVMdev] MC-JIT
Together with Jan Sjodin (in copy of this email), we begin an
implementation of the JIT with MC. The idea, suggested by Jan, is to
develop a MCJIT in parallel of the current JIT and to keep the two
implementations until (at least) the new MC one is mature enough.
Currently code is kept on gitorious
(http://gitorious.org/llvm-mc-jit/llvm-mc-jit).
Following this, a boolean "bool MCJIT =
2010 Oct 21
0
[LLVMdev] [llvm-commits] Fwd: Proof of concept patch for unifying the .s/ELF emission of .ARM.attributes
On Thu, Oct 21, 2010 at 7:50 AM, Rafael EspĂndola
<rafael.espindola at gmail.com> wrote:
>> Hmm, I wish we had this discussion way earlier..
>>
>> How would I emit things in different subsections? I can do a high
>> level switch to .ARM.attributes, and if I were emitting one blob from
>> begin to end, using the higher level interface would be preferable,
2010 Oct 21
3
[LLVMdev] [llvm-commits] Fwd: Proof of concept patch for unifying the .s/ELF emission of .ARM.attributes
> Hmm, I wish we had this discussion way earlier..
>
> How would I emit things in different subsections? I can do a high
> level switch to .ARM.attributes, and if I were emitting one blob from
> begin to end, using the higher level interface would be preferable,
> but it contains additional subsections - which are naturally
> represented by MCDataFragments - Is there an MC
2010 Jul 20
0
[LLVMdev] MC-JIT
Some boring style comments:
- whack trailing whitespace
- spaces, not tabs
- the methods in MCJITStreamer.cpp should probably have blank lines between them
There seems to be an ownership problem of the MCJITObjectWriter. If I
understand the code correctly, the assembler Finish method takes
ownership of the Writer parameter, which presumably is needed to JIT
two functions.
+1 for separate
2010 Jul 20
2
[LLVMdev] MC-JIT
...ot really clear, but with the patch :
- If no Writer is provided to the Finish method, the MCAssembler takes
ownership of the Writer it creates
- If a Writer is provided, the ownership is not taken by MCAssembler
> Ok. We could also make the streamer setup the right ObjectWriter,
> since the ObjectStreamer should always know what that is.
Yep ! It will clarify the ownership thing. But my patch was to disturb
as little as possible the other streamers. I can implement it like
this if you prefer.
> +1 for separate patches, or alternatively, can we just commit this and
> begin developing this...