search for: shied

Hi Mehdi, Should I apply your attached patch on my llvm3.8 source firstly? Or should I use the latest llvm SVN trunk instead? Steven Shi Intel\SSG\STO\UEFI Firmware Tel: +86 021-61166522 iNet: 821-6522 From: mehdi.amini at apple.com [mailto:mehdi.amini at apple.com] Sent: Monday, May 30, 2016 2:13 PM To: Shi, Steven <steven.shi at intel.com> Cc: Umesh Kalappa <umesh.kalappa0 at

> On May 29, 2016, at 5:44 PM, Shi, Steven <steven.shi at intel.com> wrote: > > (And I doubt the GNU linker supports LTO with LLVM). > [Steven]: I’ve pushed GNU Binutils ld to support LLVM gold plugin, see detail in this bug https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=20070 <https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=20070>. The new GNU ld linker works well with

Hi Steven, > On May 29, 2016, at 11:28 PM, Shi, Steven <steven.shi at intel.com> wrote: > > Hi Mehdi, > Should I apply your attached patch on my llvm3.8 source firstly? Or should I use the latest llvm SVN trunk instead? I wrote it on trunk, but I expect it to be fairly easy to port on 3.8. This is really just quickly plumbing an option on the TargetMachine creation. --

> On May 29, 2016, at 5:10 PM, Shi, Steven <steven.shi at intel.com> wrote: > > Hi Mehdi, > GCC LTO seems support large code model in my side as below, if the code model is linker specific, does the GCC LTO use a special linker which is different from the one in GNU Binutils? I don't know anything about GCC. (And I doubt the GNU linker supports LTO with LLVM). > I’m a

Hi, I searched the archives and did not find a good solution to that. assume I have 10 sets and I want to have the common character elements of them. how could i do that? -- Weiwei Shi, Ph.D Research Scientist GeneGO, Inc. "Did you always know?" "No, I did not. But I believed..." ---Matrix III

(And I doubt the GNU linker supports LTO with LLVM). [Steven]: I’ve pushed GNU Binutils ld to support LLVM gold plugin, see detail in this bug https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=20070. The new GNU ld linker works well with LLVM/Clang LTO when build IA32 code in my side. And from the ld owner input in the bug comments, the current X64 LLVM LTO issue is in llvm LTO plugin. The fact

Hi Rui, A quick question: Does lld-link only work with clang-cl with windows-msvc option? Can lld-link work with clang with linux-gnu option? Thanks Steven Shi Intel\SSG\FID\Firmware Infrastructure From: Shi, Steven Sent: Tuesday, January 29, 2019 1:32 PM To: 'Rui Ueyama' <ruiu at google.com> Cc: llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org Subject: RE: lld write wrong symbol value in .data

OK, maybe I was wrong and the “-use-unknown-locations” option is not the issue root cause. I'm not familiar with the LLVM codebase and I appreciate any suggestion on how to debug this issue. I'd like to know is it a clang issue or a lld issue? Is there a tool which can dump the obj file debug location info? Let me simplify the previous test case to reproduce this issue. All what you need

On 31 May 2016 at 01:08, Shi, Steven <steven.shi at intel.com> wrote: > Hi Mehdi, > What's the default code model for x86_64 Mac OS X App? Andrew showed me some example code of Mac OS X App as below, which looks to use the small code model but can run at >4GB high address. Small, but PIC. > For example if you read a global like this the compiler will generate this code.

On 7 June 2016 at 10:54, Shi, Steven <steven.shi at intel.com> wrote: > Hi Rafael, > I finally enable the clang LTO build with small code model and PIE, and my clang LTO Uefi firmware works now. Thank you! But I have one more issue on the clang normal build (without LTO) now. I find the small code model + "-fpie" build option will let clang generate some R_X86_64_GOTPCREL

Hi Mehdi, The llvm3.8 gold-plugin.cpp is very different from the latest one on trunk. Your patch has compiling failure on llvm3.8 as below. I will try it on latest trunk later. Thank you help anyway! Building CXX object tools/gold/CMakeFiles/LLVMgold.dir/gold-plugin.cpp.o cd /home/jshi19/llvm38releasebuild/tools/gold && /home/jshi19/clang38/bin/clang++ -DGTEST_HAS_RTTI=0

Yes, it's a little bit off-topic, but it is also planned. The data structure that the linker handles can be considered a large graph where vertices are file sections and edges are symbol names. You can say that file A depends on file B if and only if in the graph a section in file A has an edge to a section in file B. There is a plan to dump the graph in a machine-readable format such as JSON

We don't use cl::opt in gold, instead we parse the -plugin-opts that gold passes the plugin (see process_plugin_option). Cheers, Rafael On 30 May 2016 at 02:13, Mehdi Amini <mehdi.amini at apple.com> wrote: > > On May 29, 2016, at 5:44 PM, Shi, Steven <steven.shi at intel.com> wrote: > > (And I doubt the GNU linker supports LTO with LLVM). > [Steven]: I’ve pushed

Hi Mehdi, GCC LTO seems support large code model in my side as below, if the code model is linker specific, does the GCC LTO use a special linker which is different from the one in GNU Binutils? I'm a bit surprised if both OS X ld64 and gold plugin do not support large code model in LTO. Since modern system widely use the 64bit, the code need to run in high address (larger than 2 GB) is a

Hi, > On May 29, 2016, at 7:36 AM, Shi, Steven <steven.shi at intel.com> wrote: > > Hi Mehdi, > After deeper debug, I found my firmware LTO wrong code issue is related to X64 code model (-mcmodel=large) is always overridden as small (-mcmodel=small) if LTO build. And I don't know how to correctly specific the large code model for my X64 firmware LTO build. Appreciate if

Hi Rui, > but why don't you use lld-link (lld for Windows target) instead of ld.lld (lld for Unix target) to create UEFI applications? I need support both PE/COFF and ELF format tools. I’m also working on the lld-link enabling (clang-cl + lld-link) in both Linux and windows. The ld.lld enabling (clang + ld.lld) is for ELF format native users. E.g.

Hi, there: I am wondering if there is a quick way to "reverse" a list like this: t0 <- list(a=1, b=1, c=2, d=1) reverst t0 to t1 > t1 $`1` [1] "a" "b" "d" $`2` [1] "c" thanks. -- Weiwei Shi, Ph.D Research Scientist GeneGO, Inc. "Did you always know?" "No, I did not. But I believed..." ---Matrix III

I checked the LLVM master code and find that the “-use-unknown-locations” option and its related logic is only supported for Dwarf debug info as below. These codes are missing in the Codeview side. It looks the “-use-unknown-locations” option logic is not complex, could we port the code logic into llvm\lib\CodeGen\AsmPrinter\CodeViewDebug.cpp as well? I’ve submitted a BZ for this requirment:

lld should not crash in this case (so that's a bug that needs fixing), but setting it aside, did you try adding `-fno-builtin` to clang so that clang doesn't handle `memcpy` as a built-in function? On Tue, Jul 16, 2019 at 8:46 PM Shi, Steven <steven.shi at intel.com> wrote: > Hi Rui, > > For the test case in my previous email, if I change the `memcpy` to > `foobar` in

We have test latest xen (ChangeSet 7608) on VT platform with Intel 915 chipset and Here is the test summary: IA32: Build&Boot SMP xen0 without problem Can startup XenU with different configuration IA32 issues contain: VMX can not be created IA32E: Build&Boot SMP xen0 without problem Can startup XenU with different configuration IA32E issues