Displaying 6 results from an estimated 6 matches for "setcodemodelforjit".
2010 Jul 20
0
[LLVMdev] MC-JIT
...> Ok. Sorry for the too big patch. Attached is the first patch adding
> only 2 hooks on TargetMachine and on MCAssembler. Style should be LLVM
> compliant. Apply it with "patch -p0".
+ // Make sure the code model is set.
+ setCodeModelForStatic();
For the JIT, this should be setCodeModelForJIT; it makes a difference
on, for example, x86-64. I'd also suggest changing the name of the
method appropriately.
- llvm::OwningPtr<MCObjectWriter> Writer(getBackend().createObjectWriter(OS));
- if (!Writer)
- report_fatal_error("unable to create object writer!");
+ MCObje...
2010 Jul 20
2
[LLVMdev] MC-JIT
...patch. Attached is the first patch adding
>> only 2 hooks on TargetMachine and on MCAssembler. Style should be LLVM
>> compliant. Apply it with "patch -p0".
>
> + // Make sure the code model is set.
> + setCodeModelForStatic();
>
> For the JIT, this should be setCodeModelForJIT; it makes a difference
> on, for example, x86-64. I'd also suggest changing the name of the
> method appropriately.
>
> - llvm::OwningPtr<MCObjectWriter> Writer(getBackend().createObjectWriter(OS));
> - if (!Writer)
> - report_fatal_error("unable to create obj...
2010 Jul 21
0
[LLVMdev] MC-JIT
...GenOpt::Level OptLevel,
+ bool DisableVerify) {
Args above should be aligned with column after opening paren.
+ // Add common CodeGen passes.
+ if (addCommonCodeGenPasses(PM, OptLevel, DisableVerify, Ctx))
+ return true;
+ // Make sure the code model is set.
+ setCodeModelForJIT();
+
+ return false; // success!
+}
+
-void MCAssembler::Finish() {
+void MCAssembler::Finish(MCObjectWriter *Writer_) {
Why two variables Writer_ and Writer? I don't know of any rules against
modifying parameters.
...
- llvm::OwningPtr<MCObjectWriter> Writer(getBackend().createObj...
2010 Jul 20
2
[LLVMdev] MC-JIT
> In the context of the JIT, there really is no such thing as a
> relocation, just fixups. I'm not completely sure what the right
> approach is, but the JIT should be able to fully resolve all of the
> symbols that are being used in the module. We may need some extra
> interfaces to allow the JIT to tell the MCAssembler about the address
> of some external symbols though.
2010 Jul 21
1
[LLVMdev] MC-JIT
... bool DisableVerify) {
>
> Args above should be aligned with column after opening paren.
>
> + // Add common CodeGen passes.
> + if (addCommonCodeGenPasses(PM, OptLevel, DisableVerify, Ctx))
> + return true;
> + // Make sure the code model is set.
> + setCodeModelForJIT();
> +
> + return false; // success!
> +}
> +
>
> -void MCAssembler::Finish() {
> +void MCAssembler::Finish(MCObjectWriter *Writer_) {
>
> Why two variables Writer_ and Writer? I don't know of any rules against
> modifying parameters.
>
> ...
>
> - l...
2011 May 06
0
[LLVMdev] Question about linking llvm-mc when porting a new backend
...ingObjectFileELFin
libLLVMCodeGen.a(TargetLoweringObjectFileImpl.cpp.o)
vtable for llvm::TargetLoweringObjectFileCOFFin
libLLVMCodeGen.a(TargetLoweringObjectFileImpl.cpp.o)
"llvm::TargetMachine::setCodeModel(llvm::CodeModel::Model)", referenced
from:
llvm::LLVMTargetMachine::setCodeModelForJIT() in
libLLVMCodeGen.a(LLVMTargetMachine.cpp.o)
llvm::LLVMTargetMachine::setCodeModelForStatic() in
libLLVMCodeGen.a(LLVMTargetMachine.cpp.o)
"llvm::TargetMachine::getFunctionSections()", referenced from:
llvm::TargetLoweringObjectFileELF::SelectSectionForGlobal(llvm::Gl...