search for: safe

Displaying 20 results from an estimated 12729 matches for "safe".

2013 Jul 25
3
[LLVMdev] [PROPOSAL] ELF safe/unsafe sections
On 7/25/2013 3:56 PM, Rui Ueyama wrote: > I think I share the goal with you to make the foundation for better > dead-strip, so thank you for suggesting. I'm not sure if marking a section > as a whole as "safe" or "unsafe" is the best approach, though. Some > comments. > > - If the compiler generated code is always "safe", and if we can > distinguish it from hand-written assembly code by checking if there's a gap > between symbols, can we just assume a sectio...
2013 Jul 25
0
[LLVMdev] [PROPOSAL] ELF safe/unsafe sections
I think I share the goal with you to make the foundation for better dead-strip, so thank you for suggesting. I'm not sure if marking a section as a whole as "safe" or "unsafe" is the best approach, though. Some comments. - If the compiler generated code is always "safe", and if we can distinguish it from hand-written assembly code by checking if there's a gap between symbols, can we just assume a section with no gap is always &...
2013 Jul 25
4
[LLVMdev] [PROPOSAL] ELF safe/unsafe sections
Hi, Currently lld ties up all atoms in a section for ELF together. This proposal just breaks it by handling it differently. *This requires **NO ELF ABI changes. *_*Definitions :-*_ A section is not considered safe if there is some code that appears to be present between function boundaries (or) optimizes sections to place data at the end or beginning of a section (that contains no symbol). A section is considered safe if symbols contained within the section have been associated with their appropriate siz...
2009 Jun 22
4
[LLVMdev] Adding safe-point code generation
Hi all, I need to add thread-switching support to Unladen Swallow's JIT, and LLVM's safe point support looks like a good way to get code into all the right places. However, http://llvm.org/docs/GarbageCollection.html#collector-algos points out that there's no way to emit code at safe points yet, and there are no loop safe points at all. So I'll be trying to impl...
2013 Jul 25
0
[LLVMdev] [PROPOSAL] ELF safe/unsafe sections
...waran <shankare at codeaurora.org>wrote: > On 7/25/2013 3:56 PM, Rui Ueyama wrote: > >> I think I share the goal with you to make the foundation for better >> dead-strip, so thank you for suggesting. I'm not sure if marking a section >> as a whole as "safe" or "unsafe" is the best approach, though. Some >> comments. >> >> - If the compiler generated code is always "safe", and if we can >> distinguish it from hand-written assembly code by checking if there's a >> gap >> between symbols...
2009 Jun 23
0
[LLVMdev] Adding safe-point code generation
Hi Jeffrey, On 2009-06-22, at 01:49, Jeffrey Yasskin wrote: > I need to add thread-switching support to Unladen Swallow's JIT, and > LLVM's safe point support looks like a good way to get code into all > the right places. However, http://llvm.org/docs/GarbageCollection.html#collector-algos > points out that there's no way to emit code at safe points yet, and > there are no loop safe points at all. So I'...
2009 Jun 23
1
[LLVMdev] Adding safe-point code generation
On Tue, Jun 23, 2009 at 4:18 AM, Gordon Henriksen <gordonhenriksen at me.com>wrote: > Hi Jeffrey, > On 2009-06-22, at 01:49, Jeffrey Yasskin wrote: > > I need to add thread-switching support to Unladen Swallow's JIT, and LLVM's > safe point support looks like a good way to get code into all the right > places. However, > http://llvm.org/docs/GarbageCollection.html#collector-algos points > out that there's no way to emit code at safe points yet, and there are > no loop safe points at all. So I'...
2013 Jul 25
2
[LLVMdev] [PROPOSAL] ELF safe/unsafe sections
...deaurora.org>wrote: > >> On 7/25/2013 3:56 PM, Rui Ueyama wrote: >> >>> I think I share the goal with you to make the foundation for better >>> dead-strip, so thank you for suggesting. I'm not sure if marking a section >>> as a whole as "safe" or "unsafe" is the best approach, though. Some >>> comments. >>> >>> - If the compiler generated code is always "safe", and if we can >>> distinguish it from hand-written assembly code by checking if there's a >>> gap &gt...
2013 Jul 30
3
[LLVMdev] [PROPOSAL] ELF safe/unsafe sections
...w ELF section. >> >From my understanding, -ffunction-sections is a good semantic match. But it introduces a lot of bloat in the .o file which the linker must process. >> >> For reference, with mach-o we just added a flag to the overall .o file that says all sections are "safe". The compiler always generates safe object files (unless there is inline code with non-local labels) and always sets the flag. Hand written assembly files did not have the flag by default, but savvy assembly programmers can set it. > We could set this flag for ELF too in the ELF header,...
2009 Dec 08
1
[PATCH] doc: document mBFT and "safe hook"
From 8be8951015673d6279d7d49b0138645194317dc2 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Shao Miller <shao.miller at yrdsb.edu.on.ca> Date: Wed, 9 Dec 2009 19:11:38 +0000 Subject: [PATCH] doc: document mBFT and "safe hook" --- doc/memdisk.txt | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ 1 files changed, 40 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-) diff --git a/doc/memdisk.txt b/doc/memdisk.txt index 8a308f1..254cb7c 100644 --- a/doc/memdisk.txt +++ b/doc/memdisk.txt @@ -9,6 +...
2013 Jul 31
0
[LLVMdev] [PROPOSAL] ELF safe/unsafe sections
...on. >>> >From my understanding, -ffunction-sections is a good semantic match. But it introduces a lot of bloat in the .o file which the linker must process. >>> >>> For reference, with mach-o we just added a flag to the overall .o file that says all sections are "safe". The compiler always generates safe object files (unless there is inline code with non-local labels) and always sets the flag. Hand written assembly files did not have the flag by default, but savvy assembly programmers can set it. >> We could set this flag for ELF too in the ELF hea...
2011 Jul 18
3
[LLVMdev] Improving Garbage Collection
Talin, do you identify safe-points in the current or proposed llvm scheme, and if so how, or are they implicit as being at all call sites (which begs the question what about leaves in the call tree, how does GC get started at all in that case). Peter Lawrence.
2011 Jul 19
0
[LLVMdev] Improving Garbage Collection
On Mon, Jul 18, 2011 at 11:00 AM, Peter Lawrence <peterl95124 at sbcglobal.net>wrote: > Talin, > do you identify safe-points in the current or proposed llvm > scheme, and if so how, > or are they implicit as being at all call sites (which begs the question > what about leaves > in the call tree, how does GC get started at all in that case). > > The LLVM linker has a feature where you can specify...
2018 Jul 31
2
bugpoint --tool-args and --safe-tool-args
I have a failing test and bugpoint would be the perfect tool to help narrow it down. llc is the failing tool. It fails with one set of options and passes with another. I was hoping to use bugpoint like this: bugpoint -safe-llc -run-llc <testcase> -tool-args <failing args> -safe-tool-args <passing args> Unfortunately, this doesn't seem to be possible. According to the documentation both -tool-args and -safe-tool-args consume all remaining arguments so bugpoint would never see -safe-tool-args ab...
2017 Feb 08
4
[RFC] Using Intel MPX to harden SafeStack
Hi, I previously posted about using 32-bit X86 segmentation to harden SafeStack: http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/2016-May/100346.html That involves lowering the limits of the DS and ES segments that are used for ordinary data accesses while leaving the limit for SS, the stack segment, set to its maximum value. The safe stacks were cluste...
2011 Jul 19
3
[LLVMdev] Improving Garbage Collection
Talin, how about having the front-end generate an llvm.safe.point () intrinsic call at the desired safe points, and having the addresses of the GC roots (at that point, can vary from call to call) be the parameters (with noescape attribute) to the intrinsic, IIUC currently the GC roots are tagged, and all analysis and transform optimizations have t...
2012 Jan 23
4
[LLVMdev] Safe loads
Hello, For the Glasgow Haskell Compiler's backend, we would like to let LLVM know that certain loads are safe to execute speculatively and hence to hoist out of loops. At the moment, there doesn't seem to be a mechanism for doing so. There seem to be two ways of implementing this: either allow arbitrary instructions to be marked as safe and have Instruction::isSafeToSpeculativelyExecute return true for...
2014 Apr 25
2
[LLVMdev] [llvm] r206732 - Implement builtins for safe division: safe.sdiv.iN, safe.udiv.iN, safe.srem.iN,
On 04/25/2014 10:12 AM, Eric Christopher wrote: > Hi Andrew, > > Replying in both places because this mail is a pretty good summary of > issues and so it's worth replying to... my apologies for continuing in > both places. Responding to LLVMDev - I for one had missed this part of the thread. > >> The only language aspect under discussion is integer division.
2013 Jul 25
2
[LLVMdev] [PROPOSAL] ELF safe/unsafe sections
...;> On 7/25/2013 3:56 PM, Rui Ueyama wrote: >>> >>> I think I share the goal with you to make the foundation for better >>>> dead-strip, so thank you for suggesting. I'm not sure if marking a >>>> section >>>> as a whole as "safe" or "unsafe" is the best approach, though. Some >>>> comments. >>>> >>>> - If the compiler generated code is always "safe", and if we can >>>> distinguish it from hand-written assembly code by checking if there's a >...
2012 Jan 24
0
[LLVMdev] Safe loads
On Jan 23, 2012, at 4:22 AM, Roman Leshchinskiy wrote: > Hello, > > For the Glasgow Haskell Compiler's backend, we would like to let LLVM know > that certain loads are safe to execute speculatively and hence to hoist > out of loops. At the moment, there doesn't seem to be a mechanism for > doing so. There seem to be two ways of implementing this: either allow > arbitrary instructions to be marked as safe and have > Instruction::isSafeToSpeculativelyExe...