similar to: LLVM PPC JIT Error

Hi Lang, Yeah, I remember this case. Basically what’s happening is that there are relocations for ELF on x86 that use a value that is present in the object image as part of the calculation for the final value that goes in the same location. If you ever find yourself applying relocations for a second time (for instance, because the loaded object location is remapped for out-of-proc execution)

If you didn't catch it, there has been a recent post to the mailing list that seems like it might be relevant to your interests: <http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/pipermail/llvmdev/2012-June/051298.html> Direct link to the project page: <http://code.google.com/p/pymothoa/> --Sean Silva On Wed, Jul 11, 2012 at 12:37 AM, Travis Oliphant <travis at continuum.io> wrote: > Hi all,

Hi all, First, I just want to say thank you for the excellent LLVM project. I have been playing with LLVM for the first part of this year and have been quite impressed with what I've seen and what is possible. I've been coding for a long time, but haven't had this much fun since I first learned Python. The work you have done has opened the door for a tremendous amount of

Thanks, happy to of confirmed. With that in mind, will use the AST modules provided by the languages (with the exception of libclang for C++). Antoine: Am aware of Numba, nice job there BTW. So is there a [decoupled] LLVM parser which I can use to read Python files and analyse objects (including computing their attributes in OO and setattr scenarios)? On Wed, Jul 1, 2015 at 10:23 PM, Antoine

Yep we have our own parser <https://github.com/vinzenz/libpypa/> and we would love to see other people use it. When we looked around at some other Python parsers we didn't feel like any of them were easy to extract and use on their own, so we wrote our own and I think were able to keep ours well-separated. There are some things that make parsing Python somewhat difficult to do in a

Hi, I wrote yet another [1,2] Python binding for LLVM! I'm doing this because llvmlite has some serious limitations: 1) it cannot parse an existing IR, only create new modules [3], 2) it keeps its own representation of the IR (which is less memory efficient than the LLVM one), and 3) each llvmlite version supports a single LLVM version. Considering that my need is to load modules of hundreds

On Thu, 12 May 2016 16:40:44 +0100 David Chisnall via cfe-dev <cfe-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: > > The end result is that shortly after a release (sometimes every alternate release) is branched a load of downstream projects update to the new APIs, test things, and find a bunch of regressions that have been sitting in the tree for months. We then have to scrabble to bisect and try

​Hello all, I have written a code in llvmlite. Using command numba --dump-llvm example.py > example.ll I can have .ll file. However, using lli example.ll, I am stopped with error: 'main' function not found in module. Is there anyway at which it can be executed using lli? Thank you in advance Best -- This email was Anti Virus checked by Security Gateway. -------------- next part

Hello, I am a bit curious about the rationale for the current callback-based object cache API. For Numba, it would be easier if there would be a simple procedural API: - one method to get a module's compiled object code - one method to load/instantiate a module from a given piece of object code I manage to get around the callback-based API to do what I want, but it's a bit weird to work

2016-01-20 1:11 GMT+02:00 Antoine Pitrou via llvm-dev < llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org>: > On Wed, 20 Jan 2016 00:47:56 +0200 > "Eddy B. via llvm-dev" <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: > > > > I would love to know your thoughts on this, and more specifically: > > Which of the 3 (byval(T), byval(N) and byval + dereferenceable + align) > > do you

> On Jan 12, 2017, at 5:03 AM, Antoine Pitrou via llvm-dev <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: > > On Mon, 9 Jan 2017 11:43:17 -0600 > Wei Ding via llvm-dev <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: >> Hi, >> >> I want an efficient way to implement function pow in LLVM instead of >> invoking pow() math built-in. For algorithm part, I am clear for the

Hal Finkel <hfinkel <at> anl.gov> writes: > > Do you require long-term cross-release ABI and/or API stability > from the C API that you're using? Do these > other projects? For the record, in llvmlite and Numba we don't require C API stability for two reasons: 1) the C API is not enough for us and we rely on bits of the C++ API 2) we also rely on other details

IIRC when LLVM came out a bunch of community-contributed parsers were available on your website. Essentially I want to read in a programming language, prune the AST until it contains only what I define as a "summary", then convert that AST to that of another language, before finally outputting [code-generating] a compilable/interpretable source [think boilerplate]. Would be good to

Hi, On Wed, Apr 2, 2014 at 1:03 AM, Michael Spencer <bigcheesegs at gmail.com> wrote: > On Mon, Mar 31, 2014 at 10:54 AM, Simon Atanasyan <simon at atanasyan.com> wrote: >> As far as I understand now it is impossible to generate ELF object >> file with relocation sections using yaml2obj tool. I plan to support >> ELF relocations in the yaml2obj. Does anybody work

Hello, We are happy to release version 0.10.0 of llvmlite. llvmlite is a light-weight Python binding for LLVM (compatible with Python 2.7 as well as Python 3.4 and later). It stems from the needs of the Numba community and is geared towards creating JIT compilers. llvmlite is available both as source code and as binaries for a number of platforms. Source code is available on PyPI and Github:

On Tue, Feb 17, 2015 at 8:56 AM, Antoine Pitrou <antoine at python.org> wrote: > > Hi, > > Dirkjan Ochtman <dirkjan <at> ochtman.nl> writes: > > > > As far as I understand, this change is wanted because the LLVM > > infrastructure derives no value from knowing the types, and there's a > > cost in terms of code spent to support all of it.

> On Jan 12, 2017, at 12:58 PM, Friedman, Eli via llvm-dev <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: > > On 1/12/2017 9:33 AM, Mehdi Amini via llvm-dev wrote: >>> On Jan 12, 2017, at 5:03 AM, Antoine Pitrou via llvm-dev <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: >>> >>> On Mon, 9 Jan 2017 11:43:17 -0600 >>> Wei Ding via llvm-dev <llvm-dev at

On 4/2/2014 12:23 PM, Nick Kledzik wrote: > On Apr 1, 2014, at 9:19 PM, Shankar Easwaran wrote: > >> Hi Nick, Bigcheese, >> >> When lld is used to link C++ code, it would be required to demangle symbol names by default/user driven option. >> >> The Gnu linker has the following options :- >> >> --demangle=[style] >> --no-demangle >>

Hi Nick, Bigcheese, When lld is used to link C++ code, it would be required to demangle symbol names by default/user driven option. The Gnu linker has the following options :- --demangle=[style] --no-demangle I found that clang/llvm-symbolizer use __cxx_demangle function. I would think that lld also need to call the same function, and I think the way we want to demangle is to have the

I'm trying to compile LLVM with musl libc library. The compilation process fails on the following: x86_64-linux-musl-g++ -DGTEST_HAS_RTTI=0 -DLLVM_BUILD_GLOBAL_ISEL -D__STDC_CONSTANT_MACROS -D__STDC_FORMAT_MACROS -D__STDC_LIMIT_MACROS -Ilib/Support -I../lib/Support -Iinclude -I../include -fPIC -fvisibility-inlines-hidden -Werror=date-time -std=c++11 -Wall -W -Wno-unused-parameter