search for: schwalbe

If you send me details about how you're building this I'll look into it. -Andy -----Original Message----- From: Mario Schwalbe [mailto:mario at se.inf.tu-dresden.de] Sent: Wednesday, May 22, 2013 2:34 AM To: Kaylor, Andrew Cc: Mario Schwalbe; LLVM Devel Subject: Re: [LLVMdev] Static linking of execution engine Hi, Am 21.05.13 21:57, schrieb Kaylor, Andrew: > Yeah, this is a problem with the static constructor getting...

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Hi, as the subject says, I was just wondering where the implementation of sys::fs::canonicalize() might be. The function is declared in llvm/Support/FileSystem.h, but I couldn't find its implementation within lib/Support. Consequently, any application using this function doesn't link. Am I missing something here? Regards, Mario -----BEGIN

On 19 July 2012 09:10, Mario Schwalbe <mario at se.inf.tu-dresden.de> wrote: > as the subject says, I was just wondering where the implementation of > sys::fs::canonicalize() might be. Looks like it got implemented, then reverted due to buildbot breakage, and never re-committed: http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/pipermail/llvm-com...

Hi, Am 21.05.13 21:57, schrieb Kaylor, Andrew: > Yeah, this is a problem with the static constructor getting optimized out. Including "JIT.h" is supposed to fix that. > Is it possible that the file where you are including "JIT.h" doesn't have any required code in it? I'm including "JIT.h" directly in the main module, which also uses the engine. See

...not to modify the LLVM code, you can also work around this problem by using ExecutionEngine::createJIT(), which does not make the dlopen check. I suspect that code path is not well tested, so there may be additional problems if you do things that way. -Andy -----Original Message----- From: Mario Schwalbe [mailto:m3o.s6e at googlemail.com] Sent: Wednesday, May 22, 2013 11:30 AM To: Kaylor, Andrew Cc: Mario Schwalbe; LLVM Devel Subject: Re: [LLVMdev] Static linking of execution engine Am 22.05.13 19:32, schrieb Kaylor, Andrew: > If you send me details about how you're building this I'll...

Am 22.05.13 19:32, schrieb Kaylor, Andrew: > If you send me details about how you're building this I'll look into it. Thanks. I forgot to mention it's LLVM 3.2 on Ubuntu 12.10. The command line is: $ g++-4.7 ExecutionEngineTest.cpp $(llvm-config --cxxflags --ldflags --libs) -lpthread -ldl $ g++-4.7 -static ExecutionEngineTest.cpp $(llvm-config --cxxflags --ldflags --libs)

Hi, I can confirm this problem. We use clang's libtooling ToolInvocation object and the second module fails to compile even through it's a completely fresh instance. Adding -fno-vectorize explicitly seems to work around this problem, but does anyone know a real fix? ciao, Mario Am 20.06.13 15:07, schrieb Alan Garny: > My application generates some C code which I then compile using

Hi, My application generates some C code which I then compile using LLVM+Clang before running it. For the compilation side of things, I have a class which one of the methods (the CompilerEngine::compileCode() method in https://raw.github.com/opencor/opencor/llvm_3.3/src/plugins/misc/Compiler/sr c/compilerengine.cpp) is based on the code from the clang-interpreter example

Hi all, I currently use LLVM 3.0 clang to compile my source code to bitcode (on a X86-64 machine) before it is later processed by a pass, like this: $ clang -m32 -O3 -S foo.c -emit-llvm -o foo.ll However, for some reason the the resulting module contains 128-bit instructions, e.g.: %6 = load i8* %arrayidx.1.i, align 1, !tbaa !0 %7 = zext i8 %6 to i128 %8 = shl nuw nsw i128 %7, 8 which the

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Hi, I know similar questions have been asked several times, but I couldn't find an answer in earlier threads. Is it safe to process several modules concurrently in different threads if they share the same LLVM context instance, i.e., is the context implementation thread-safe? Thanks and ciao, Mario -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Hi, are the llvm.memset.p0i8.i32 and llvm.memset.p0i8.i64 intrinsics meant to be used for 32-bit and 64-bit architectures, respectively depending on the module's target datalayout? Or can I use any of them? If yes, why are there two functions? Sorry, if it's obvious, but the documentation wasn't that clear. Thanks and ciao, Mario

...Including "JIT.h" is supposed to fix that. Is it possible that the file where you are including "JIT.h" doesn't have any required code in it? -Andy -----Original Message----- From: llvmdev-bounces at cs.uiuc.edu [mailto:llvmdev-bounces at cs.uiuc.edu] On Behalf Of Mario Schwalbe Sent: Tuesday, May 21, 2013 4:52 AM To: LLVM Devel Subject: [LLVMdev] Static linking of execution engine Hi, I'm on Linux and trying to link an application that makes use of LLVM's JIT execution engine statically. Setup: (1) LLVM libs are compiled as static libraries. (2) Called Initiali...

On 12/13/13 4:00 AM, Mario Schwalbe wrote: > Hi all, > > although I feel like this is a too simple question, I can't find the answer > right now. > > I have a pass that changes the alignment constraints of global variables > of a module, which doesn't affect any loads and stores of them. So how > do I...

The Scalar Replacement of Aggregates pass (-scalarrepl) generates these big integers. We recently added a constructor parameter to limit the size of the wide integer loads. -----Original Message----- From: llvmdev-bounces at cs.uiuc.edu [mailto:llvmdev-bounces at cs.uiuc.edu] On Behalf Of Mario Schwalbe Sent: Saturday, July 07, 2012 22:19 To: llvmdev at cs.uiuc.edu Subject: [LLVMdev] Large integers -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Hi devs, I'd like to ask for some advise about optimization passes. Which pass might be responsible for this LLVM IR and why? %0 = load i288* bitcas...

Hi, I'm on Linux and trying to link an application that makes use of LLVM's JIT execution engine statically. Setup: (1) LLVM libs are compiled as static libraries. (2) Called InitializeNativeTarget(). (3) Included llvm/ExecutionEngine/JIT.h. It works if I build and link regularly. However, if I add -static when linking, the execution engine fails to initialize. Does anyone know why?

Hi all, although I feel like this is a too simple question, I can't find the answer right now. I have a pass that changes the alignment constraints of global variables of a module, which doesn't affect any loads and stores of them. So how do I get the loads' and stores' alignment constraints also updated to match my changes? Is there any pass that does so? Ideally without

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Hi devs, I'd like to ask for some advise about optimization passes. Which pass might be responsible for this LLVM IR and why? %0 = load i288* bitcast ([9 x i32]* @array to i288*), align 16 %1 = lshr i288 %0, 224 array is just a global constant array of 9 integers and the code only accesses individual elements. The LLVM version is 3.1. Thanks,

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Hello devs, I'd like to ask for some advise about adding a backend. I followed the steps at http://llvm.org/docs/WritingAnLLVMBackend.html (also adding the backend to the configure script, so it compiles (on Linux) with LLVM 3.1. However, llvm-build fails with: llvm[0]: Constructing LLVMBuild project information. Usage: llvm-build [options]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Hi all, unless I overlook something, the second version of CloneFunction() (from http://llvm.org/doxygen/Cloning_8h_source.html): 00114 Function *CloneFunction(const Function *F, 00115 ValueToValueMapTy &VMap, 00116 bool ModuleLevelChanges, 00117 ClonedCodeInfo *CodeInfo =

Hi, I'm writing to both lists as I'm not sure what the cause of this issue is. I use code like this to compile C source into LLVM IR as suggested on the Clang mailing list previously. class CompileBitcodeAction : public clang::EmitLLVMOnlyAction { protected: Module*& dstModule; public: inline CompileBitcodeAction(Module*& dstModule, LLVMContext* const context = NULL)