search for: safepointed

Displaying 20 results from an estimated 126 matches for "safepointed".

2013 Oct 26
1
[LLVMdev] Interfacing llvm with a precise, relocating GC
On Fri, Oct 25, 2013 at 8:35 PM, Philip Reames <listmail at philipreames.com>wrote: > On 10/25/13 1:10 PM, Ben Karel wrote: > > > > > On Thu, Oct 24, 2013 at 6:42 PM, Sanjoy Das <sanjoy at azulsystems.com>wrote: > >> Hi Rafael, Andrew, >> >> Thank you for the prompt reply. >> >> One approach we've been considering involves
2013 Oct 26
0
[LLVMdev] Interfacing llvm with a precise, relocating GC
On 10/25/13 1:10 PM, Ben Karel wrote: > > > > On Thu, Oct 24, 2013 at 6:42 PM, Sanjoy Das <sanjoy at azulsystems.com > <mailto:sanjoy at azulsystems.com>> wrote: > > Hi Rafael, Andrew, > > Thank you for the prompt reply. > > One approach we've been considering involves representing the > constraint "pointers to heap objects
2013 Oct 25
3
[LLVMdev] Interfacing llvm with a precise, relocating GC
On Thu, Oct 24, 2013 at 6:42 PM, Sanjoy Das <sanjoy at azulsystems.com> wrote: > Hi Rafael, Andrew, > > Thank you for the prompt reply. > > One approach we've been considering involves representing the > constraint "pointers to heap objects are invalidated at every > safepoint" somehow in the IR itself. So, if %a and %b are values the > GC is
2020 Sep 18
3
GC-parseable element atomic memcpy/memmove
TLDR: a proposal to add GC-parseable lowering to element atomic memcpy/memmove instrinsics controlled by a new "requires-statepoint” call attribute. Currently llvm.{memcpy|memmove}.element.unordered.atomic calls are considered as GC leaf functions (like most other intrinsics). As a result GC cannot occur while copy operation is in progress. This might have negative effect on GC latencies
2014 Feb 24
2
[LLVMdev] Pointer vs Integer classification (was Re: make DataLayout a mandatory part of Module)
On 02/24/2014 11:27 AM, Andrew Trick wrote: > > On Feb 24, 2014, at 11:17 AM, Philip Reames <listmail at philipreames.com > <mailto:listmail at philipreames.com>> wrote: > >> >> On 02/24/2014 12:45 AM, Andrew Trick wrote: >>> >>> On Feb 21, 2014, at 10:37 AM, Philip Reames >>> <listmail at philipreames.com <mailto:listmail at
2020 Sep 30
2
GC-parseable element atomic memcpy/memmove
Thanks for the feedback. I think both of the suggestions are very reasonable. I’ll incorporate them. Given there were no objections for two weeks, I’m going to go ahead with posting individual patches for review. One small question inline: On Sep 28, 2020, at 10:56 AM, Philip Reames <listmail at philipreames.com<mailto:listmail at philipreames.com>> wrote: In general, I am
2009 Feb 24
2
[LLVMdev] Detecting counted loops
I need to be able to detect a well-behaved loop. (i.e one where exp1 assigns a value to an int i, exp2 compares i with a loop constant, exp3 adjusts i by a loop constant, and the inner block has no assignments to i.) I need this because in Sun's Java VM garbage collection only takes place at safepoints, so a potentially unbounded loop must call safepoint() some time. However, safepoints are
2013 Oct 23
0
[LLVMdev] GC StackMaps (was Stackmap and Patchpoint Intrinsic Proposal)
I'm moving this to a different thread. I think the newly proposed intrinsic definitions and their current implementation are valuable regardless of how it gets tied into GC... On Oct 22, 2013, at 6:24 PM, Philip R <listmail at philipreames.com> wrote: > Adding Gael as someone who has previously discussed vmkit topics on the list. Since I'm assuming this is where the GC support
2013 Oct 23
2
[LLVMdev] GC StackMaps (was Stackmap and Patchpoint Intrinsic Proposal)
Hi all, I don't know if I understand everything, but it seems really interesting for a runtime developer, stackmap and patchpoint looks perfect for a lot of optimizations :) I just have few question to verify if I understand what are these stackmaps and patchpoints, and I discuss the GC after. * I have a first very simple scenario (useful in vmkit). Let's imagine that we want to lazily
2013 Oct 26
3
[LLVMdev] Interfacing llvm with a precise, relocating GC
I'm also highly interested in relocating-GC support from LLVM. Up until now my GC implementation has been non-relocating which is obviously kind of a bummer given that it inhibits certain classes of memory allocation/deallocation tricks. I wrote up a bunch of my findings on the implementation of my GC here: https://code.google.com/p/epoch-language/wiki/GarbageCollectionScheme Frankly I
2014 Feb 26
5
[LLVMdev] Representing a safepoint as an instruction in the x86 backend?
I've got a pseudo instruction with some tricky semantics I need help figuring out how to encode properly. For those interested, this is to support fully relocating garbage collection. I'm going to try to express the requirements clearly so that you don't need to understand the use case in detail. My end goal is to capture a list of registers and/or stack offsets for a list of
2013 Oct 23
5
[LLVMdev] [RFC] Stackmap and Patchpoint Intrinsic Proposal
Adding Gael as someone who has previously discussed vmkit topics on the list. Since I'm assuming this is where the GC support came from, I wanted to draw this conversation to the attention of someone more familiar with the LLVM implementation than myself. On 10/22/13 4:18 PM, Andrew Trick wrote: > On Oct 22, 2013, at 3:08 PM, Filip Pizlo <fpizlo at apple.com > <mailto:fpizlo
2015 Jun 17
2
[LLVMdev] design question on inlining through statepoints and patchpoints
The long term plan is a) evolving, and b) dependent on the specific use case. :) It would definitely be nice if we could support both early and late safepoint insertion. I see no reason that LLVM as a project should pick one or the other since the infrastructure required is largely overlapping. (Obviously, I'm going to be mostly working on the parts that I need, but others are always
2014 Jun 04
4
[LLVMdev] Code for late safepoint placement available
As I've mentioned on the mailing list a couple of times over the last few months, we've been working on an approach for supporting precise fully relocating garbage collection in LLVM. I am happy to announce that we now have a version of the code available for public view and discussion. https://github.com/AzulSystems/llvm-late-safepoint-placement
2008 Jun 12
4
[LLVMdev] Possible miscompilation?
...mr 4, 27 2655: bl print_value 2656: ori 4, 21, 7712 2657: li 3, 634 2658: bl trace_bytecode 2659: lis 3, 4031 2660: lwz 3, -12952(3) 2661: cmplwi 0, 3, 1 2662: beq 0, BB10_218 # do_safepoint 2663: BB10_41: # safepointed 2664: cmpw 0, 27, 26 2665: bge 0, BB10_169 # bci_637 2666: BB10_42: # bci_132 2667: lis 21, 3984 2668: ori 4, 21, 6756 2669: li 3, 132 2670: bl trace_bytecode 2671: ori 4, 21, 6556 2672: li 3, 133 2673:...
2014 Jul 16
5
[LLVMdev] IR Liveness Analysis?
Is anyone aware of an existing framework for asking liveness questions about SSA values in the IR? I'm looking for something more precise than the trivial definition provided by SSA itself. I can write something myself (and will if need be), but it seemed like a generic enough problem that I was surprised I couldn't find something already in tree. Anyone know of something I've
2014 Dec 05
9
[LLVMdev] Future plans for GC in LLVM
Now that the statepoint changes have landed, I wanted to start a discussion about what's next for GC support in LLVM. I'm going to sketch out a strawman proposal, but I'm not set on any of this. I mostly just want to draw interested parties out of the woodwork. :) Overall Direction: In the short term, my intent is to preserve the functionality of the existing code, but migrate
2013 Dec 18
0
[LLVMdev] GCModuleInfo and MCJIT
Hi! I have now a more precise question, I hope that this time, someone will be able to help me :) I'm now able to find the gc meta data. To find this data, I simply register a GCMetadataPrinter (just like during an AOT compilation). A GCMetadataprinter is called at the end of the compilation of a module after having assigned the slots to the live roots. I have almost everything except that
2011 Oct 31
2
[LLVMdev] Adding a custom GC safe point creation phase
Hi Chris, Gordon, Here's a patch to allow a GCStrategy to customize the places where it wants to insert safe points. I'm not sure who maintains the GC code today in LLVM (I'd be happy to take ownership, if needed). The patch just adds up a custom safepoints flag, similar to the way the GCStrategy can customize intrinsics lowering, or roots initialization. It works pretty well, as
2011 Nov 01
0
[LLVMdev] Adding a custom GC safe point creation phase
On 2011-10-31, at 17:21, Nicolas Geoffray wrote: > Here's a patch to allow a GCStrategy to customize the places where it wants to insert safe points. I'm not sure who maintains the GC code today in LLVM (I'd be happy to take ownership, if needed). > > The patch just adds up a custom safepoints flag, similar to the way the GCStrategy can customize intrinsics lowering, or