similar to: "Beginner" keyword for LLVM Bugzilla?

Hello everyone, I've been using LLVM for quite some time now (for writing my own toy compilers) and I've been following this mailing list for the last few months. I would like to start making contributions to the project. I have no particular area of interest right now (in the sense that I find pretty much all of LLVM fascinating). Are there any known low hanging fruit that I could tackle

On 04/11/2017 07:50 AM, Andrew Holway wrote: >> I'd much rather have a bash script to look at-- and manually step through. > > Is that a joke? Bash is an almighty impenetrable nightmare. I've been doing > *nix for nearly 10 years and *still* am unable to read anything vaguely > complicated in bash whereas I can write fairly decent python after 6 > months. From my

Thank you for the link and the suggestion to try master! I did so and discovered that it reproduces on master for me as well. The repro script I used (unchanged from before) and the output can be found here: https://gist.github.com/modocache/d9700166067f4a155820bc57d9bee1f3 (Note that the output looks nearly identical, but it's using clang-10 from the master branch of llvm-project.) I wonder

> On Wed, Jun 28, 2017 at 8:13 AM, Hal Finkel <hfinkel at anl.gov> wrote: > > I don't object to adding some kind of filtering option, but in general it won't help. An important goal here is to provide analysis (and other) tools to users that present this information at a higher level. The users won't, and shouldn't, know exactly what kinds of messages the tools use.

Hello all, I'm trying to better understand the state of Mach-O support in lld. The lld docs state that "the linker supports ELF (Unix), PE/COFF (Windows), Mach-O (macOS) and WebAssembly in descending order of completeness." [1] True to that statement, I found an email on this list from Jan 2018 stating that "MachO support in lld is not really ready for real world usage. It was

Hello! (+cc Adam Nemet, since he presented on optimization remarks at LLVM Dev Mtg 2016) I have a large C++ program, which I am compiling using a sampling profile generated via perf and AutoFDO. I'd like to use this profile in order to show the hotness of each code path that is displayed in the new optimization remarks viewer tool ( https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qq0q1hfzidg). It seems,

Hello all, It's been a month since my previous email on the topic, and since then I've done some initial work on porting the coroutines passes to the new pass manager. In total there are 6 patches -- that's a lot to review, so allow me to introduce the changes being made in each of them. # What's finished In these first 6 patches, I focused on lowering coroutine intrinsics

Adam, thanks for all the suggestions! One nice aspect of the `-Rpass` family of options is that I can filter based on what I want. If I only want to see which inlines I missed, I could use `clang -Rpass-missed="inline"`, for example. On the other hand, optimization remark YAML always include remarks from all passes (as far as I can tell), which increases the amount of time it takes

Hello all! I find that using lldb to debug LLVM libraries can be super frustrating, because a lot of LLVM classes, like the constructor for StringRef, are marked LLVM_ATTRIBUTE_ALWAYS_INLINE. So when I attempt to have lldb evaluate an expression that implicitly instantiates a StringRef, I get 'error: Couldn't lookup symbols: __ZN4llvm9StringRefC1EPKc'. As an example, most recently

Hello all, In https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qq0q1hfzidg, Adam Nemet (cc'ed) describes optimization remarks and some future plans for the project. I had a few follow-up questions: 1. As an example of future work to be done, the talk mentions expanding the set of optimization passes that emit remarks. However, the Clang User Manual mentions that "optimization remarks do not really make

Vedant, Jeremy, Thanks a ton! I copied ASan's use of 'replaceDbgDeclare', think that worked! https://github.com/modocache/llvm-project/commit/afbc04e1dcba has some extremely quick and dirty changes I made (with no tests!), and a link to a Gist with the LLVM IR and DWARF produced, https://gist.github.com/modocache/6f29093ba2827946011b422ed3bd2903. There's only one kink: the spot

Hi Mikhail, As Brian noted, stuff like this works better in the new pass manager. Even in the old pass manager I thought it should work though. Did you initialize the pass, via `INITIALIZE_PASS_DEPENDENCY(PostDominatorTreeWrapperPass)`? Did you require it, via ` AU.addRequired<PostDominatorTreeWrapperPass>();`? Btw. May I ask what you are planning to do? Cheers, Johannes On 01/07,

Andrew Holway wrote: >> >> I'd much rather have a bash script to look at-- and manually step >> through. > Same here. > > Is that a joke? Bash is an almighty impenetrable nightmare. I've been > doing *nix for nearly 10 years and *still* am unable to read anything vaguely > complicated in bash whereas I can write fairly decent python after 6 > months.

I haven't fully parsed this thread (sorry!), but I wanted to briefly mention that the SafeStack & ASan passes both do something similar (I think): move local variables backed by allocas onto a separate stack. These passes use replaceDbgDeclare to rewrite dbg.declares s.t. they point into the new stack. After that, llvm presumably runs LowerDbgDeclare (usually via InstCombine), but all the

I ran into an LLVM/Clang crash when attempting to do the following: 1. Build Clang from the release/9.x branch source. 2. Use the Clang from (1) to build clangd on the release/9.x branch, with LLVM_ENABLE_MODULES=On. I wrote a script to reproduce the crash: https://gist.github.com/modocache/ac366ca9673b93bb21e75d3e72162608 At the above URL, you'll find a script `repro.sh` that reproduces

Dear all, I would like to use the PostDominatorTree in ArgPromotion. I did not find an example of how to use function level analysis inside CallGraphSCCPass. I tried to follow an example of how to use function-level pass in a module pass, but I hit "llvm_unreachable" in PMDataManager::addLowerLevelRequiredPass. What would be a proper way to make PostDominatorTree available in

Hello all! (+cc Vedant Kumar, who I've been told knows a lot about UBSan!) I am trying to fix an assert that occurs when the transforms in llvm/lib/Transforms/Coroutines are applied to LLVM IR that has been generated with UBSan enabled -- specifically, '-fsanitize=null'. You can see an example of the assert in this 26-line C++ file here: https://godbolt.org/g/Gw9UZq Note that

I'd be interested in the existence of a high-quality, open-source, portable linker for apple platforms, but not enough to help make that happen. If I _was_ gonna work on something related to that, I'd probably be inclined to instead add any required features to allow an ELF linker to target a notional darwin-elf target, and to have clang emit darwin-elf object files, and then write a

Hi Brian, On Tue, Feb 25, 2020 at 7:43 PM Brian Gesiak <modocache at gmail.com> wrote: > In other words, the value of %i is stored on the frame object, on the > heap, at an offset of 7 into the frame. I'm beginning to think a > fundamental fix for this issue would be to stop replacing > llvm.dbg.declare with llvm.dbg.value, and instead replace the > llvm.dbg.declare with

Thanks for the response, Rui! On Tue, Jun 5, 2018 at 5:26 PM, Rui Ueyama <ruiu at google.com> wrote: > > Besides the features you pointed out, I think Xcode introduced a new way > of listing dynamic linking symbols, and I believe lld doesn't support that. > .tbd files, is that right? A colleague of mine pointed me to Apple's libtapi open source project [1], maybe I can