similar to: Reviving the DebugIR pass

Hi Dan, Having missed this functionality myself in the past I’m excited to see this gain traction. Let me know if there’s anything I can do to help this along. Cheers, Jonas On Wed, 21 Mar 2018 at 18:19, Dan Liew via llvm-dev <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: > Hi, > > I recently had the need to see the correspondence between some Clang > generated LLVM IR and the compiled

We have implemented a debug pass to enable debugging of jitted functions. The pass dumps the IR of the module at the beginning of the pass, which then becomes the source code for the debug metadata. Our solution focuses on a windows x86 solution but I’m sure it would be easy to extend to other platforms. In order to load the resulting debugging info into Visual Studio, we jit to object file then

+ 1 to having this functionality implemented as `llvm-as -g` or some analog (`clang -g foo.ll`). As I outlined in https://reviews.llvm.org/D40778 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D40778>, I think such a solution can be made to work for JIT users who don't have on-disk *.ll files. > On Mar 21, 2018, at 5:37 PM, Jason Surprise via llvm-dev <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: > >

Hello all, I recently felt the need to have debug info at the LLVM IR level (because my frontend's semantics vastly differ from IR that it doesn't make much sense to use it). Asm can sometimes be too "low level", so it's nice to have the ability to single-step at the IR level. The pass that used to do this (-debugir) bitrotted and was removed from tree. I spent the weekend

Hi List, My IR compiles fine and runs. I've tried to add DebugIR pass so as to be able to debug and profile it (since source is an SQL query all that I can debug and profile is IR itself). When I tried to add it to pass manager I got the following assert: Program received signal SIGABRT, Aborted. 0x00007ffff3fe4425 in __GI_raise (sig=<optimized out>) at

Please do take over the pass revival. College hasn't left me with the bandwidth to continue this side project :) If there's small things here and there, I'd be happy to pitch in. However,.whipping the patch into shape is beyond me right now. Thanks Siddharth On Fri 23 Mar, 2018, 00:53 via llvm-dev, <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: > > >> This work could also

>> This work could also be used to fix [3]. Although this probably needs >> more though because there's the question of whether we should preserve >> existing debug information in an LLVM IR file or write over it when it >> is given to Clang. > > If foo.ll contains edited debug info, `clang -g` shouldn't silently drop > the edits. A warning + no-op seems

Hi I am looking at open projects that LLVM want to implement and it seems to be a suggestion to write an LLVM IR level debugger. Is there any existing LLVM projects out there that already does such a thing? If not, I would like to try implementing one myself. By debugger, I think it means something like gdb, where you can insert breakpoints, run code and observe layout of registers and memory at

>> This work could also be used to fix [3]. Although this probably needs >> more though because there's the question of whether we should preserve >> existing debug information in an LLVM IR file or write over it when it >> is given to Clang. > > > If foo.ll contains edited debug info, `clang -g` shouldn't silently drop the > edits. A warning + no-op

You can attach debug info to the Llvm module about LLVM IR, at which point one can throw the executable into any debugger and get llvm level debugging. I've started a patch to revive this feature (DebugIR pass). I've been sidetracked the past month, but I'll come back to it soon :) https://reviews.llvm.org/D40778 Cheers, Siddharth On Thu 4 Jan, 2018, 09:23 Brenda So via llvm-dev,

I'm not sure I have a clear picture of what you're JIT'ing. If any of the JIT'ed functions call other JIT'ed functions, it may be difficult to find all the dependencies of a functions and recreate them correctly on a subsequent load. Even if the JIT'ed functions only call non-JIT'ed functions, I think you'd need some confidence that the address of the called

Thanks for responding. Sorry for the delay in my reply, but I was dealing with hurricane Sandy. Anyway.... My software build produces libmylib.so. The JIT'd function only calls external C functions in libmylib.so and not other JIT'd functions. The C functions are simple thunks to call constructors. For example, given: class BinaryNode : public Node { public: BinaryNode( Node

> > On Aug 30, 2017, at 12:51 AM, Jiri Danek via llvm-dev < > llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: > I found https://github.com/google/java-thread-sanitizer, which seems to > be now abandoned. It used to work with ThreadSanitizer v1. Has anybody ever > tried to make it work with the current ThreadSanitizer? > > I gave it a try and bending java-thread-sanitizer to my

Hello, I've been looking at ThreadSanitizer in https://github.com/llvm-mirror/compiler-rt and I noticed some Java-related files. Is there a version of ThreadSanitizer build on top of that, which I could use to sanitize my Java programs? I could not find any. I found https://github.com/google/java-thread-sanitizer, which seems to be now abandoned. It used to work with ThreadSanitizer v1. Has

On Nov 24, 2012, at 3:50 PM, Rafael Espíndola wrote: > On 24 November 2012 17:36, Chris Lattner <clattner at apple.com> wrote: >> As others have said, unfortunately it is premature to remove the old jit. I don't know of anyone using the EH code though... It can almost certainly be removed! > > Cool. I will remove the EH bits by the end of the week if no one complains.

Hi, I’m wondering if it’s possible to debug code JIT’ed with the newer ORC JIT. The LLVM documentation has a page at llvm.org/docs/DebuggingJITedCode.html <http://llvm.org/docs/DebuggingJITedCode.html> showing an example of using gdb to debug MCJIT’ed code, but has no mention of ORC JIT. From searching around online I’ve gotten the impression that ORC JIT does *not* support providing

Hi, Is there a way to find out how much memory some JIT'ed machine code uses ? Simon. -- Simon Burton, B.Sc. Licensed PO Box 8066 ANU Canberra 2601 Australia Ph. 61 02 6249 6940 http://arrowtheory.com

I don't think that GDB support is even present in the latest version of the old JIT in trunk. It used to have code to register emitted functions with GDB in a way that let GDB find the function name and EH frame information, but that got taken out back in January (r147615). As it stands now, I don't think GDB would provide any useful information at all about code emitted by the old JIT.

This is a proposal to create memory safety instrumentation and optimization passes for LLVM. Abstract: The goal of this project is to modify SAFECode and AddressSanitizer (ASAN) to use a common set of memory safety instrumentation and optimization passes to increase code reuse. These tools and other similar ones use varying methods to detect whether memory accesses are safe, but are fundamentally

I'd like some similar work to be done, although I view it a bit differently. This might be a separate analysis pass that knows nothing about ASAN or SAFECode and appends metadata nodes to memory access instructions saying things like - this access can not go out of buffer bounds - this access can not touch free-ed memory - this access can not participate in a race - this read