search for: thetarget

...: llvm::InitializeAllTargetInfos(); llvm::InitializeAllTargetMCs(); llvm::InitializeAllAsmParsers(); llvm::InitializeAllDisassemblers(); std::string Error; std::string TripleName("aarch64-unknown-linux-gnu"); Triple TheTriple(Triple::normalize(TripleName)); const Target *TheTarget = TargetRegistry::lookupTarget(TripleName, Error); if (!TheTarget) { std::cerr << "llvm_insts_to_binary(): " << Error; return 1; } Then, I move on to creating some of the needed ASM / REG info and an MCContext, etc.: std::unique_ptr<MCRegisterInfo> MRI(T...

Hello, My question in 2 words is the following: Is it mandatory to generate host keys on the target host, or can they be generated on another host and transfer to thetarget host ? If my question is not clear here is an example... I need to install host keys on a host server. I imagine the usual way is to launch the following command locally on the host server . # ssh-keygen -t rsa1 -f /usr/local/etc/ssh_host_key -N "" My question is: Is is possible to...

...Triple *TheTriple = NULL; if ( DoMingw ) { TheTriple = new Triple("i686-pc-mingw32"); } else { TheTriple = new Triple("i686-pc-win32"); } Assert(!TheTriple->getTriple().empty()) //TheTriple.setTriple(sys::getHostTriple()); 9 std::string Err; const Target *TheTarget = TargetRegistry::lookupTarget(TheTriple->getTriple(), Err); if (TheTarget == 0) { printf( "Error selecting target\n" ); return false; } /* CodeGenOpt::None CodeGenOpt::Less CodeGenOpt::Default CodeGenOpt::Aggressive */ CodeGenOpt::Level OLvl = CodeGenOpt::Aggr...

...sembling from. In LLVM 4.0 and above the only value of the PC parameter that works is zero. Please can someone look into fixing this? Kind Regards James P.S. Example code below: TripleName = "x86_64-pc-linux-gnu"; // Get the target. std::string Error; DecodeAsmX86_64::TheTarget = llvm::TargetRegistry::lookupTarget(TripleName, Error); if (!TheTarget) return 1; ... // Set up disassembler. DisAsm = TheTarget->createMCDisassembler(*STI, *Ctx); if (!DisAsm) return 1; ... // S = DisAsm->getInstruction(*Inst, Size, Bytes_A, PC, // /*REMOV...

On 23 May 2015 at 00:08, Jim Grosbach <grosbach at apple.com> wrote: > This is the key question. The LLVM assumption is that these sorts of things > are inferable from the triple. Your observation here that the GNU world’s > notion of triples and LLVM’s need not be the same is a good one. Having a > split and a translation up in clang seems an interesting avenue to explore. >

...rent PC being disassembled it will see of the symbol has the N_ARM_THUMB_DEF bit set or not. And then switch disassemblers between the arm and thumb disassemblers. While this is a bit of a hack there are a limited set of Mach-O cpus otool(1) deals with. For llvm-objdump, it eventually just calls TheTarget->createMCDisassembler() and gets one disassembler for TheTarget it created. I talked to Jim a bit about sinking the logic of maintaining multiple disassemblers down into the core disassembler logic and using subtarget to select between them. Like the ARMAsmParser and I think the ARMInstPrinte...

...ngRef TheArchString("arm-apple-darwin"); // std::string normalized = llvm::Triple::normalize(TheArchString); // // llvm::Triple TheTriple; // TheTriple.setArch(llvm::Triple::arm); // TheTriple.setOS(llvm::Triple::Darwin); // TheTriple.setVendor(llvm::Triple::Apple); // llvm::Target *TheTarget = NULL; return 0; }

...ngRef TheArchString("arm-apple-darwin"); // std::string normalized = llvm::Triple::normalize(TheArchString); // // llvm::Triple TheTriple; // TheTriple.setArch(llvm::Triple::arm); // TheTriple.setOS(llvm::Triple::Darwin); // TheTriple.setVendor(llvm::Triple::Apple); // llvm::Target *TheTarget = NULL; return 0; } _______________________________________________ LLVM Developers mailing list LLVMdev at cs.uiuc.edu http://llvm.cs.uiuc.edu http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/llvmdev -- IMPORTANT NOTICE: The contents of this email and any attachments are confidential and may...

...-darwin"); > // std::string normalized = llvm::Triple::normalize(TheArchString); > // > // llvm::Triple TheTriple; > // TheTriple.setArch(llvm::Triple::arm); > // TheTriple.setOS(llvm::Triple::Darwin); > // TheTriple.setVendor(llvm::Triple::Apple); > // llvm::Target *TheTarget = NULL; > > return 0; > } > _______________________________________________ > LLVM Developers mailing list > LLVMdev at cs.uiuc.edu http://llvm.cs.uiuc.edu > http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/llvmdev > > > -- IMPORTANT NOTICE: The contents of this em...

...set up the runtime calls correctly. We don't need to completely solve this problem. Yet. :) > If you have a global variable, what target "sees" it? Does it need to > be annotated along with the function? For a tool like llc, wouldn't it be simply a matter of changing TheTarget and reconstituting the various passes? The changes we have waiting to upstream already allow us to reconstitute passes. I sometimes use this to turn on/off debugging on a function-level basis. The way we've constructed our backend interface should just allow us to switch the target and reini...

...by-1 errors.") and with this rule if you've already used a name for a type, you can't reuse it for a variable of that type. So what do you do instead? Often it seems the answer is to use an acronym (Target T), which hurts readability, or prepend "The" to the type name (Target TheTarget), which wastes space and also hurts readability because the start and end of a word are the most important for readnig. [5] So we've got declarations like "LB(L, PSE, LI, DT, TLI, TTI, AC, ORE, VF.Width, IC, &LVL, &CM)" [6] which is quite intimidating to newcomers. If we cou...

...ort/ManagedStatic.h" #include "llvm/Support/MemoryBuffer.h" +#include "llvm/System/Program.h" #include <cassert> #undef VISIBILITY_HIDDEN extern "C" { @@ -272,6 +273,10 @@ PerModulePasses = new PassManager(); PerModulePasses->add(new TargetData(*TheTarget->getTargetData())); + // If writing to stdout, set binary mode. + if (asm_out_file == stdout) + sys::Program::ChangeStdoutToBinary(); + // Emit an LLVM .bc file to the output. This is used when passed // -emit-llvm -c to the GCC driver. PerModulePasses->add(CreateBitcodeWrite...

On Mar 2, 2012, at 12:04 AM, David Meyer <pdox at google.com> wrote: > ARM subtarget features are determined by parsing the target tuple string TT. (ParseARMTriple(StringRef TT) in ARMMCTargetDesc.cpp) > > In llc, the -march setting overrides the architecture specified in -mtriple. So when you invoke: > > $ llc -march arm -mtriple armv7-none-linux ... > >

ARM subtarget features are determined by parsing the target tuple string TT. (ParseARMTriple(StringRef TT) in ARMMCTargetDesc.cpp) In llc, the -march setting overrides the architecture specified in -mtriple. So when you invoke: $ llc -march arm -mtriple armv7-none-linux ... ParseARMTriple() will see TT == "arm-none-linux" instead of "armv7-none-linux". As a result, the

Patch for review. On Mon, Aug 21, 2017 at 11:45 PM Puyan Lotfi <puyan.lotfi.llvm at gmail.com> wrote: > Ping. > > Still working on preparing code for review. Will have a patch for review > ready in the coming days. > > PL > > On Tue, Aug 15, 2017 at 12:06 PM Puyan Lotfi <puyan.lotfi.llvm at gmail.com> > wrote: > >> Hi, >> >> >>

... std::string normalized = llvm::Triple::normalize(TheArchString); >> // >> //  llvm::Triple TheTriple; >> //  TheTriple.setArch(llvm::Triple::arm); >> //  TheTriple.setOS(llvm::Triple::Darwin); >> //  TheTriple.setVendor(llvm::Triple::Apple); >> //  llvm::Target *TheTarget = NULL; >> >> return 0; >> } >> _______________________________________________ >> LLVM Developers mailing list >> LLVMdev at cs.uiuc.edu         http://llvm.cs.uiuc.edu >> http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/llvmdev >> >> >> -- IMPO...

...in the front-end, but it seems like we could design some abstraction. > > > If you have a global variable, what target "sees" it? Does it need to > > be annotated along with the function? > > For a tool like llc, wouldn't it be simply a matter of changing > TheTarget and reconstituting the various passes? The changes we have > waiting to upstream already allow us to reconstitute passes. I > sometimes use this to turn on/off debugging on a function-level basis. > > The way we've constructed our backend interface should just allow us to > swi...

Agreed, that sounds like the best plan. I'll look into moving LLILC to ORC. Thanks -Joseph From: Russell Hadley Sent: Friday, May 29, 2015 8:13 PM To: Lang Hames; Joseph Tremoulet Cc: llvmdev at cs.uiuc.edu Subject: RE: [LLVMdev] MCJit interface question Hey Joseph, What Lang said made me wonder. Is it the right time for us (LLILC) to move to ORC? The long term plan was to go there but

Hi John, On Tue, 14 May 2019 at 17:51, Joan Lluch <joan.lluch at icloud.com> wrote: > This problem is also shared by the MSP430 target, and it’s very easy to reproduce by just compiling the code that I posted before. That's some good detective work; it definitely explains what you're seeing. Since MSP430 is affected it would probably be pretty easy to upstream an alignment-aware