similar to: JIT and atexit crash

> It's not the job of the Orc engine. I could argue about this, but I won’t :) > Just don't use atexit. The problem is that I run third-party programs. I cannot control them. > On 20. Nov 2017, at 01:04, Joerg Sonnenberger via llvm-dev <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: > > On Mon, Nov 20, 2017 at 12:22:49AM +0100, Alex Denisov via llvm-dev wrote: >> JIT

Maybe the easiest workaround would be overriding symbol resolution for the function name and redirect it to your own version in static code (and hope it has no bad side effect on your use case). I think when running 3rd party code, the only way to definitely avoid this kind of trouble is to never deallocate any code or data sections. Doug Binks mentioned that too in his cppcast about Runtime

Hi, Not sure whether this matches your use case, but the Orc-based JIT used in LLI appears to be using `llvm::orc::LocalCXXRuntimeOverrides` (http://llvm.org/doxygen/classllvm_1_1orc_1_1LocalCXXRuntimeOverrides.html) to override `__cxa_atexit`: https://github.com/llvm-mirror/llvm/blob/release_50/tools/lli/OrcLazyJIT.h#L74

Hi Bjoern, CCing cfg-dev (since that's where the conversation started) and llvm-dev (since it's relevant there). Do you know if there is a way to obtain the fully resolved obj-code? I > wanted to load the functions into a shared memory, but how? The only thing > I receive is a function pointer, but I don't know how large the function > 'behind' is. Even a call to

Firstly, apologies if this is not the right place to be asking this question--feel free to point me in the correct direction. I could be doing something wrong here but stackoverflow didn't feel like the correct place for this since there's so little there about LLVM ORC. Basically, I have a reproduction case (below) where if I throw an exception before I call JITSymbol::getAddress()

Hi David, This looks like bad eh-frame data due to a failure to fix up the frame descriptor entries: <debug: adding frame> EHFrameAddr: 0x7feae5827000, EHFrameLoadAddr: 0x00000000e5827000, EHFrameSize: 60 ==64588==ERROR: AddressSanitizer: SEGV on unknown address 0x7feae5827020 (pc 0x7feae886d970 bp 0x000000000001 sp 0x7ffca10e75f8 T0) Eyeballing the code in RuntimeDyldELF (vs

Hi David, Thanks very much for that. I'll continue to dig in as time permits, and I'll update the bug report with my progress once it's filed. Cheers, Lang. On Mon, Apr 17, 2017 at 6:42 PM, David Lurton <dlurton at gmail.com> wrote: > Thanks Lang. I think I'll go the bug creation route. I have an email out > to llvm-admin requesting an account on bugs.llvm.org.

Hi David, Sorry to hear. Has anyone followed up with you yet? I've continued to dig in to this in my spare time and I've found the issue. It's a use-after-free, rather than any sort of memory smashing. ORC is currently failing to deregister the EH-frame section when the JIT is torn down (but *is* deallocating the memory for it). Normally that's not disastrous (though it does

I tree to compile the LLVM ORC JIT examples. But I'm stuck in some problems I can't solve my own. First at all I compile with C++14 enabled with latest stable LLVM and clang, this means 4.0.1. I get the following error. Do I missed some specific compile option? Compilation looks like this here. |CompilingcontribJIT.cpp PWD:/home/ikuehl/projects-llvm/TurboLisp/domainEngineer

Hi I’ve previously used the ExecutionEngine::addGlobalMapping to make existing functions available to my JITed code. I’m currently using ORC, as MCJIT does not appear to be maintained any longer (the kaleidoscope examples have not worked for some time with MCJIT). I’m using just the basic ORC CompileLayer directly. So, I’ve essentially copied the ExecutionEngine::addGlobalMapping related

Hi Andy, I haven't tested this on Linux, but on MacOS the RuntimeDyldMemorManager::getSymbolAddressInProcess method should find symbol addresses in the host program, including symbols from static archives linked into the program. However, one gotcha is that the symbol has to be reachable from main, otherwise the linker may strip it from the final executable. Do you have a test-case that I

Hi Andy, I think that makes sense. I'm currently rewriting the core Kaleidoscope tutorials - I'll look at adding support for this. - Lang. On Fri, Aug 14, 2015 at 7:38 AM, Andy Somogyi <andy.somogyi at gmail.com> wrote: > After some fiddling with it, it does in fact look like it works as you > describe Lang. > > The trick was you had to call > >

Lang, I added the add/get global mapping to my kaleidoscope JIT, but I think perhaps these would make more sense if they were added to the object linking layer as they would be generally usable there. On Aug 19, 2015, at 11:19 PM, Andy Somogyi wrote: > Hey Lang, > > I've added this to my Kaleidoscope JIT, and it seems to work just fine, basically I copied the global mapping

Hi, I'm attempting to port some code which uses the GlobalMappingLayer in the Orc JIT. This code worked fine in LLVM 4, but I'm getting a compile error with LLVM 5. I think the problem is that this layer hasn't been modified to account for some of the changes made in LLVM 5, but I wanted to make sure that I wasn't missing something. I have code which looks like this:

Hi Brian, Yes - I believe you're correct. I'm working on a fix and extra test coverage now. In the meantime, I believe you should be able to fix the signatures in your copy and everything should "just work". Cheers, Lang. On Fri, Sep 22, 2017 at 2:04 PM, Brian Kahne via llvm-dev < llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: > Hi, > > > > I’m attempting to port

I am upgrading our JIT application to use LLVM 6.0.0, and with this transition I am making the move to use the new MCJIT facility. A problem I am encountering is that the math functions from libm are not resolved/found. I am using the lambda resolver from the KaleidoscopeJIT class which first searches the present modules and, if that is unsuccessful, continues the search in the whole process

Hi Alex, loading the symbols explicitly helped. With this the build process doesn't need any additional linker flags. Very nice. Thanks, Frank On 06/28/2018 04:38 PM, Alex Denisov wrote: > Hi Frank, > > If I am not mistaken it doesn't look in the whole process space by default. > Please, try loading all the symbols explicitly: > >

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

When using ORC JIT, I'm having trouble with external function resolution (that is, of a function defined in the app, with C linkage). I add a declaration for the function to my IR, and when I use MCJIT, it finds it and all is well, But when I use ORC JIT (I *think* correctly, at least it closely matches what I see in the tutorial), I get an LLVM error, "Program used external function

Hi Larry, Thanks so much! This seems to do the trick. I would have spun my wheels for > a long time before discovering all of this, wow. No worries. :) I'll try to keep this in mind and make sure I address it in future Kaleidoscope tutorial chapters - these issues tripped me up the first time I encountered them too. Do I even want to know what additional chickens need to be sacrificed