similar to: IE ?

> On Mar 14, 2017, at 3:02 AM, Mehdi Amini <mehdi.amini at apple.com> wrote: > >> >> On Mar 11, 2017, at 4:30 PM, Moritz Angermann via llvm-dev <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: >> >> Hi Matthias, >> >> what I’m observing right now is that replacing opt+llc with an clang invocation, and >> subsequently fewer intermediate files,

Hi Matthias, what I’m observing right now is that replacing opt+llc with an clang invocation, and subsequently fewer intermediate files, increases the consumed time with -O0 by 200%. We used to always run opt with -mem2reg -globalopt, and I believe those are not part of -O0 (is there an easy way to list all passes that -OX flags to clang imply for the optimizer and code gen?). Could the IR imply

Firstly, do you need "main.dsp" defined as an external symbol, or can all external references go via "main"? If the answer is the latter, that will make the solution simpler. If only the latter, you will need to make a change to LLVM here: http://llvm-cs.pcc.me.uk/lib/CodeGen/AsmPrinter/AsmPrinter.cpp#650 Basically you would need to add a hook to the TargetLoweringObjectFile

I suspect that the format isn't important if you do that, but I wouldn't recommend it, at least because inlining (and other inter-procedural optimizations) are not expected to work correctly if you produce IR like that. Peter On Mon, Mar 6, 2017 at 6:44 PM, Moritz Angermann <moritz.angermann at gmail.com > wrote: > Peter, > > thanks again! Yes, we only need to refer to

Hi Matthias, I’m trying to see if I can make do with the clang interface only. How do I pass flags to opt or llc? Say I want to enable/disable tbaa, which could be done with `--enable-tbaa=true/false` or `-mem2reg` or `-globalopt`? Would the `-llvm` switch be, what I’m looking for or the `-Xclang`, or something else entirely? Cheers, Moritz > On Mar 11, 2017, at 2:26 AM, Matthias Braun

> On Oct 8, 2016, at 10:41 AM, Eric Christopher via llvm-dev <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: > > > > On Fri, Oct 7, 2016 at 11:57 PM Moritz Angermann via llvm-dev <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org <mailto:llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org>> wrote: > Hi, > > I’ve noted some change in wording on the current (4.0) developer policy[1], > compared to the 3.9

Hi, I was wondering, if someone could point me into the right direction, towards building just llc and opt (potentially 4.0 + patches) to distribute them in the interim with compiler? The idea is that we’d like to pin our llvm ir code generator to a specific set of llc and opt tools, with potential patches applied, until we manage to get all those patches upstreamed. I’d like to find answers to

Hi Tim, thanks for the swift response! @debug is defined in the same module, which makes this all the more confusing. The target information from the working example are: target datalayout = "e-m:e-p:32:32-i64:64-v128:64:128-a:0:32-n32-S64" target triple = "armv6kz--linux-gnueabihf" from the ghc produced module: target datalayout =

On Mon, Mar 6, 2017 at 5:54 PM, Moritz Angermann <moritz.angermann at gmail.com > wrote: > Hi Peter, > > I’ve just experimented with this a bit: > > Say we would end up with the following assembly: > > .section __TEXT,__text > .globl _main > > .long 1 > _main: > inc %eax > ret > > .globl _main.dsp > .alt_entry _main.dsp

well i discoverd, HL uses waveIn, which is a part of the DirectSound ... so ... is there a Wine binding for waveIN ? - -moritz angermann

Thanks! I also found test/CodeGen/ARM/ghc-tcreturn-lowered.ll, which tests only for thumbv7-eabi, so, i tried a few more variations: [x] arm64-apple-ios [x] arm64-apple-ios7.0.0 [x] arm64-apple-darwin [x] armv7-apple [x] thumbv7-apple [x] thumbv7-apple-darwin [x] i386-apple-ios [x] i386-apple-darwin [f] thumbv7-apple-ios [f] thumbv7-apple-ios7.0.0 [f] armv7-apple-ios I’ve also just build a

Hi Tim, Ohh, I completely forgot to attach the source. Running this with: $ llc -O2 -mcpu=generic HeapStackCheck.ll -mattr=+soft-float -o HeapStackCheck.s results in 0 llc 0x000000010fea65e6 llvm::sys::PrintStackTrace(llvm::raw_ostream&) + 37 1 llc 0x000000010fea5b3a llvm::sys::RunSignalHandlers() + 83 2 llc

Hi, I’ve run into a case where `llc -mattr=+soft-float` for "armv7-unknown-linux-androideabi” segfaults, while `llc -float-abi=soft` does not. Similarly if the "target-features"="+soft-float” metadata is embedded, llc segfaults. I fear I’m missing something rather subtle here, could someone help me understand the differences? Cheers, Moritz

That is in theory what omitting the .subsections_via_symbols directive is supposed to do, but in an experiment I ran a year or two ago I found that the Mach-O linker was still dead stripping on symbol boundaries with this directive omitted. In any case, a more precise approach has more recently (~a few months ago) become possible. There is a relatively new asm directive called .altentry that, as

Hi *, in the process of improving the ios experience with ghc, I ran into the following issue: the produced llvm code[1] compiles for `armv7-apple-darwin`, unless optimization level is 0, however it fails to compile at all for `armv7-apple-ios`. I was able to reduce the produced code, while retaining the compilation issue on `armv7-apple-ios` to the following sample case: —————————————————————

Hi, I just came across a rather annoying behavior with llvm 3.9. Assuming the following samle code in test.ll: ; Lets have some global int x = 4 @x = global i32 10, align 4 ; and two strings "p = %d\n" for the prefix data, ; as well as "x = %d\n" to print the (global) x value. @.str = private unnamed_addr constant [8 x i8] c"x = %d\0A\00", align 1 @.str2 = private

Hi, I’ve stumbled across something curious with the Relase_40 I have built here: I tried to build for aarch64-apple-iphoneos, but ended up getting ELF objects $ clang -target aarch64-apple-iphoneos -c tmp.ll -o tmp.o warning: overriding the module target triple with aarch64-apple-iphoneos [-Woverride-module] 1 warning generated. bin $ file tmp.o tmp.o: ELF 64-bit LSB relocatable, ARM aarch64,

Hi Moritz, On 26 September 2017 at 09:09, Moritz Angermann via llvm-dev <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: > I’ve run into a case where `llc -mattr=+soft-float` for > "armv7-unknown-linux-androideabi” segfaults, while > `llc -float-abi=soft` does not. Similarly if the > "target-features"="+soft-float” metadata is embedded, > llc segfaults. The float-abi

Hi, I’ve noted some change in wording on the current (4.0) developer policy[1], compared to the 3.9 developer policy[2]. Specifically the part about IR Backwards Compatibility. The change from 3.9 to 4.0 is the following: - The textual format is not backwards compatible. We don’t change it too often, but there are no specific promises. - Additions and changes to the IR should be reflected

so after i send allready somecomments ... i got once an answer, about at patch -------- cut ------------ "(^-_-^)" <moritz.angermann@gmx.net> wrote: > i'm trying to install flash5-trail with wine ... > but it runs an hour while using 90% of my Prozezzor, > and nothing happens ! > i use the CVS version from yesterday. > i've no windows on my box ! >