search for: printstation

Gordon reminded me that most people seem to generate code using code, whereas it has become natural for me to use templates to generate code. Let me include an example from an article I'm working on (Java centric). The same argument goes for LLVM IR templates versus using the C++ interface. Generating LLVM IR for me is super simple. Here are a few of my templates for generating IR

So, when performing expression evaluation, lldb trips over an assert in clang/lib/AST/RecordLayoutBuilder because ExternalFieldOffsets doesn't contain a FieldDecl that updateExternalFieldOffset expected. I found that the assert occurs when both static and non-static member variables are present. For instance, with the following, the lldb command 'expr my_test.length()' does not

FYI, this turned out to be an error of omission in LLDB in SymbolFileDWARF, because the case of a non-defining external (i.e. a static member variable) wasn't being handled with a variable lookup to dig up the location. I'll put a patch together for lldb-commits, - Ashok From: llvmdev-bounces at cs.uiuc.edu [mailto:llvmdev-bounces at cs.uiuc.edu] On Behalf Of Thirumurthi, Ashok

Hi Terence, The reason I remarked, actually, is that for LLVM in particular the C+ + API offers more safety, and emitting .ll generally requires at least partially reimplementing the IR object model. I think this is a topic in the FAQ. But both are perfectly valid approaches! - Gordon On Apr 23, 2008, at 14:04, Terence Parr <parrt at cs.usfca.edu> wrote: > Gordon reminded me that

...Disk Home Directories Domain=[HARAPARTNERS] OS=[Unix] Server=[Samba 3.6.4] Server Comment --------- ------- HP1 HP1 Samba Server Workgroup Master --------- ------- DB HP4 HARAPARTNERS HP1 WORKGROUP PRINTSTATION [wynkoop at dt0 ~]$ I was also able to join the FreeBSD workstation to the Samba Domain as evidenced by the output of wbinfo: [wynkoop at dt0 ~]$ wbinfo -u nobody wynkoop testme www alish [wynkoop at dt0 ~]$ Note that users testme www and alish do not exist on the workstation. T...

Hi Geoff, Nothing in that backtrace leaps out at me. Based on the stack trace and description my first guess would be a clang misconfiguration rather than a JIT bug. How is that clang invocation being made? Is it from inside a callback from ORC, or is it before you add your module to the JIT? -- Lang. On Mon, Aug 3, 2020 at 5:41 AM Geoff Levner <glevner at gmail.com> wrote: > Here,

Greetings, Lang and other JITters, Last week I moved our Orc v2-based app from top-of-tree to the new 11.x branch, and it no longer handles C++ code containing OpenMP directives correctly. More specifically, if I JIT compile a function containing OpenMP parallel/for pragmas, using a release version of LLVM, the code compiles and seems to work, but if I try to write the module's bitcode to

Hi, That patch was from an ongoing effort to consolidate OpenMP generation in clang. If memory serves the implementation there is still a little incomplete. It's supposed to use types from OMPConstants rather than ones it defined itself and the methods used to create the functions shouldn't need to be static. However attempting this caused a lot of errors so there might be an underlying

Thanks, Joseph and Johannes. I have not merged in anything, I am using the code from the repository as is. What is this -debug-only option, and to whom would I pass it? I am running our own JIT application, which uses clang to compile modules on the fly via clang::CompilerInstance::ExecuteAction(). Working on the assumption that there is a mismatch in the declared type of an OpenMP runtime

I ran into an LLVM/Clang crash when attempting to do the following: 1. Build Clang from the release/9.x branch source. 2. Use the Clang from (1) to build clangd on the release/9.x branch, with LLVM_ENABLE_MODULES=On. I wrote a script to reproduce the crash: https://gist.github.com/modocache/ac366ca9673b93bb21e75d3e72162608 At the above URL, you'll find a script `repro.sh` that reproduces

Dear sir, Thanks for your reply. I apologize for taking a few days to reply. > Crashed how? Please see the below. > Have you turned on ASan? Not yet, but thanks for the suggestion. I guess I will try to rebuild my modified Clang+LLVM with addr. san. and see what happens. > I recommend attaching a minimal reproduction... Well, since I`m hacking on LLVM itself, this is not

Yep, it happens three times, then crashes afterwards, since I removed the assert... arg 0: expected %struct.ident_t* got %struct.ident_t.21* value @0 = private unnamed_addr global %struct.ident_t.21 { i32 0, i32 514, i32 0, i32 0, i8* getelementptr inbounds ([23 x i8], [23 x i8]* @.str, i32 0, i32 0) }, align 8 arg 0: expected %struct.ident_t* got %struct.ident_t.21* value @1 = private

...this is moving from llvm-commits to llvm-dev. On Feb 10, 2012, at 12:14 PM, Sergei Larin <slarin at codeaurora.org> wrote: > 1) Can a BB presented to the MI scheduler be _not_ terminated (end on a non > terminator MI) under any circumstances? Below you are speaking about "Empty > blocks, or blocks with only a single instruction that not a terminator..." - > What

Yeah, I remember encountering that error before when getting it to pass the libomp test suite. If you have a struct named "ident_t" somewhere the compiler will rename it because of the conflict with the runtime declaration. This should be solved by casting the usage to the function type found in the definition (i.e. bitcasting a struct.ident_t.21 to struct.ident_t) which solved the

Dear all, In the process of trying to add optimization for better layout of global variables, I have run up against a roadblock: I don`t seem to be able to sort the contents of a "SymbolTableListTraits<GlobalVariable>" -- or even swap two elements in that list -- without causing LLVM to crash. I have tried writing a comparator class and then using "llvm::iplist<

I have a new problem: Register RBP is used in a function foo. (I am not allocating RBP to any virtual register, the instances of RBP in function foo are in the machine code when my register allocator starts.) Function foo calls function bar. Register RBP is not saved across the call, though it is live after the call. Function bar includes a virtual register. The code that I'm using to

On 11/30/2012 6:36 PM, Lang Hames wrote: > > > RBP is used as the frame pointer on x86 (hence its automatic > appearance in your code), and shouldn't be allocated to any vreg in > function bar. Loading/saving RBP should be managed by the stack frame > setup/teardown code. > If it doesn't already, your allocator should filter out reserved > registers (See