search for: stdcall

...pile this simple testing tool http://github.com/oneclick/rubyinstaller/blob/fake/resources/tools/fakeruby.c I get the following: C:\Users\Jon\Documents\CDev\sandbox>llvm-gcc -Wall -o fakeruby.exe fakeruby.c Warning: resolving _GetModuleHandleA by linking to _GetModuleHandleA at 4 Use --enable-stdcall-fixup to disable these warnings Use --disable-stdcall-fixup to disable these fixups Warning: resolving _GetProcAddress by linking to _GetProcAddress at 8 Warning: resolving _GetEnvironmentVariableA by linking to _GetEnvironmentVariableA at 12 Warning: resolving _GetCurrentProcessId by linking to _G...

Everything appears to install properly under wine when I'm setting up Millennium, but when I try to launch it, I get the following error: "The procedure entry point phoneInitializeExA could not be located in the dynamic link library tapi32.dll" I know tapi support in wine is woefully underdeveloped, but does anyone know if there's some kind of work-around for this kind of

The problem is a bitcode implementation that has a stdcall function that's used from native code. 1 side has _elements_exception_handler, compiled that would be __elements_exception_handler at 20 due to stdcall. The native bit has the mangled name and the linker can't find it as the bitcode indexes have it without mangling. I'll try to prepare...

Hi, I'm trying to load a dynamic link library and it seems to work (is.loaded -> TRUE). When I run the function, which calls the .Fortran subroutine, R crashes! I'v tried the same in S-Plus 2000 and it worked. Therefore I suppose that the dll has been compiled with the stdcall calling convention (and not cdecl). But the problem is that I don't have access to the source code, I've just the dll without any working import library. Maybe someone could be so kind and send me an example how to write a wrapper? I've found one example at the NAG's site (http://ww...

Hi, I'm trying to run the following module in lli on LLVM 2.6, Windows/MSVS 2008, 32 bits memory model: --- declare x86_stdcallcc i8* @GetStdHandle(i32) define i32 @main() { %handle = call i8* @GetStdHandle(i32 -11) ret i32 0 } --- (This small modules that just retrieve the handle to stdout using WIN32 API). I'm converting it to bytecode using: llvm-as.exe -f helloworldwin32.ll and running it with lli...

...e it will always emit "\01__elements_exception_handler at 20" as the function name. It probably does that for precisely this reason. On Fri, Mar 30, 2018 at 11:55 AM Carlo Kok via llvm-dev < llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: > The problem is a bitcode implementation that has a stdcall function that's > used from native code. 1 side has _elements_exception_handler, compiled > that would be __elements_exception_handler at 20 due to stdcall. The native > bit has the mangled name and the linker can't find it as the bitcode > indexes have it without mangling. >...

...sts.llvm.org> wrote: > On Fri, Mar 30, 2018, at 11:23, Carlo Kok via llvm-dev wrote: > > When having a project that's partially bitcode and partially native > code, should lld allow linking a native .o to a bitcode .o? > > > > specifically in my case, I've got an stdcall function in bitcode, called > by native code, but it can't find the symbol (bitcode has it > > unmangled, native code with _ and @20) > > > When having thinlto enabled in both ends the same thing happens (but > bitcode on both ends works fine) > _________________________...

...def void __attribute__((fastcall)) (*f_t)(int i); int main() { f(42); f_t fp = f; fp(42); } Clang does not catch the attribute on f_t; instead it produces a warning "'fastcall' attribute only applies to function types". so the function pointer might be miscompiled. stdcall should cause the similar problem as well. On x64 there is no use of fastcall or stdcall. so Clang produces a correct php executable. - xi On Fri, Apr 3, 2009 at 1:20 PM, Anders Johnsen <skabet at gmail.com> wrote: > What version of clang are you using? It could be a regression between...

Hello > Is the x86_stdcallcc call convention actually supported? I found it by > digging into LLVM sources Yes. It's fully supported. > Is my initial LLVM-IR correct for invoking WIN32 API function? No. You forgot to put calling convention on the call itself. -- With best regards, Anton Korobeynikov Faculty of M...

2009/12/9 Anton Korobeynikov <anton at korobeynikov.info> > Hello > > Is my initial LLVM-IR correct for invoking WIN32 API function? > No. You forgot to put calling convention on the call itself. > Thanks, this work great! I naively though it would pick up the call convention from the declaration as there was no error like we have when the wrong number of parameters is

Hello > I naively though it would pick up the call convention from the declaration > as there was no error like we have when the wrong number of parameters is > used. This is not an error, you're just invoking undefined behaviour. -- With best regards, Anton Korobeynikov Faculty of Mathematics and Mechanics, Saint Petersburg State University

I too have stumbled over this. Wouldn't it be a good idea to add a check for this to the function verifier pass? Hans Anton Korobeynikov wrote: > Hello > >> I naively though it would pick up the call convention from the declaration >> as there was no error like we have when the wrong number of parameters is >> used. > This is not an error, you're just

Hans Wennborg wrote: > I too have stumbled over this. > > Wouldn't it be a good idea to add a check for this to the function > verifier pass? No. This is a FAQ: http://llvm.org/docs/FAQ.html#callconvwrong Nick > > > Hans > > Anton Korobeynikov wrote: >> Hello >> >>> I naively though it would pick up the call convention from the declaration

On Thu, Dec 10, 2009 at 12:21 PM, Nick Lewycky <nicholas at mxc.ca> wrote: > Hans Wennborg wrote: >> I too have stumbled over this. >> >> Wouldn't it be a good idea to add a check for this to the function >> verifier pass? > > No. This is a FAQ: http://llvm.org/docs/FAQ.html#callconvwrong IMO you could move the cc to the type and still replace mismatched

Hi! When I set the calling convention of a function to stdcall this has no effect. When I set stdcall to all call instructions then it works. So I wonder what is the use of the calling convention of a function? -Jochen

Seems my problem was the reverse; the definition did NOT have stdcall properly set; which is why i wasn't found. Setting that and everything worked. Thanks for the help. On Fri, Mar 30, 2018, at 23:40, Reid Kleckner wrote: > Clang may be avoiding this problem because it will always emit "\01__elements_exception_handler at 20" as the function name....

...lo, Arnold. Only quick comments, I'll try to make a full review a little bit later. > 0.)a fast calling convention (maybe use the current > CallingConv::Fast, or create a CallingConv::TailCall) > 1.) lowering of formal arguments > like for example x86_LowerCCCArguments in stdcall mode > we need to make sure that later mentioned CALL_CLOBBERED_REG is > not used (remove it from availableregisters in callingconv > for argument passing?) This can be acceptable, only if function has internal linkage. Otherwise, we cannot change calling convention of the func...

...iff -r 54192:54193 libgcc2.c Index: libgcc2.c =================================================================== --- libgcc2.c (revision 54192) +++ libgcc2.c (revision 54193) @@ -2091,6 +2091,10 @@ #endif } +#ifdef __i386__ +extern int VirtualProtect (char *, int, int, int *) __attribute__((stdcall)); +#endif + int mprotect (char *addr, int len, int prot) { The attached patch fixes it for me, it just checks that winbase has not already been included. Hope this helps, Julien -- Julien Lerouge PGP Key Id: 0xB1964A62 PGP Fingerprint: 392D 4BAD DB8B CE7F 4E5F FA3C 62DB 4AA7 B196 4A62 PGP...

When having a project that's partially bitcode and partially native code, should lld allow linking a native .o to a bitcode .o? specifically in my case, I've got an stdcall function in bitcode, called by native code, but it can't find the symbol (bitcode has it unmangled, native code with _ and @20)

I'm trying to understand the LLVM calling conventions. Coming from a Windows C++ background, I'm familiar with three calling conventions: cdecl, stdcall, and fastcall. It looks like cdecl corresponds to ccc in LLVM, but I'm not sure about the other two. Best Regards, Jon