similar to: clang llvm cross compile with autotools

Hi Teresa Thanks for your very quick and clear explanation. I have one more question. The emit-llvm option will give you the IR for a single source file when you compile it with -c. All of those files when combined give the IR in the preopt.bc temp file. =========== So if I use "clang -emit-llvm -c" to generate the .ll file. It should be the same as the one I generated by using

Hi David Thank you very much for your suggestions. ScopeLine works well. It could represent the start of a function. Do you know whether I can get the start column of this function? Many Thanks Regards Muhui 2018-05-30 3:25 GMT+08:00 David Blaikie <dblaikie at gmail.com>: > > > On Tue, May 29, 2018 at 5:25 AM Muhui Jiang via llvm-dev < > llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org>

These are the bitcode at different stages of the LTO portion of the compile. LTO merges the IR for all files being linked and optimizes them as a single monolithic module. The preopt.bc is the merged IR just after merging and before performing any LTO optimizations. internalize.bc is after performing whole program internalization. opt.bc is after the optimization pipeline, and .precodegen.bc is

Hi I am building the llvm IR to generate the control flow graph. I am using autotools(configure, make) to compile my whole program. I use the -save-temps option to save the llvm IR. Now I would like to generate a control flow graph on binary level. I may need the dwarf information to know the mapping between source code and binary code. Besides, I may also need to know the relationship between

On Tue, May 29, 2018 at 5:25 AM Muhui Jiang via llvm-dev < llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: > Hi > > I am using LLVM to help me do some code analysis. I wrote a LLVM Function > Pass to help me to generate some information. I use the code below to get > the source line information for every instruction. > > for (BasicBlock &BB : F){ > for(Instruction &I:

Hi I use the LDFLAGS=" -flto -fuse-ld=gold -Wl,-plugin-opt=save-temps " to generate the makefile and to make the whole program. However, found four different kinds of bitcode for each target. For example, I am compiling coreutils. For the program "nohup", I can get nohup.0.0.preopt.bc nohup.0.2.internalize.bc nohup.0.4.opt.bc nohup.0.5.precodegen.bc If I am right, I

Hi I am using LLVM to help me do some code analysis. I wrote a LLVM Function Pass to help me to generate some information. I use the code below to get the source line information for every instruction. for (BasicBlock &BB : F){ for(Instruction &I: BB){ DILocation* Loc = I.getDebugLoc().get(); unsigned Line = Loc->getLine() } } I think the function's first

Hi LLVM Devs I am not sure whether this is the right email to ask such kind of question. If not, please tell me the right mailing list. I am new to llvm and I am going to use llvm to do some task related to program analysis. Now I would like to generate llvm IR. I know that we can use the command like "clang -S -emit-llvm" to get the llvm IR. However, I would like to have a makefile

Hi Muhui, I tried to grep the "DW_TAG_subprogram" from the debug_info . However, I noticed that the number I found is still less than the whole functions I found with LLVM IR. Do you have any experiences? Many Thanks The only explanation that comes to mind, is that the functions are not in the final binary object file. However, previously you said you believed they were present. If

Hi Peter I guess this is the document written by you https://fosdem.org/2018/schedule/event/crosscompile/attachments/slides/2107/export/events/attachments/crosscompile/slides/2107/How_to_cross_compile_with_LLVM_based_tools.pdf I follow it to try to use the clang to do cross compilation. Actually, my target binaries is SPECCPU2006 and autotools based binaries. However, I failed on the first

Hi Dave Sorry, I meant the hardware you're using to compile LLVM - you mentioned it took you a long time to rebuild it so it would be hard for you to write/experiment on tests. ============================= Compiling LLVM doesn't take me too much time(less than 2 hours). The hardware is good enough and I am using interl E5 CPU. What I mean is that it took me a long time to analysis the

Hi Dave I am not going to access any hardware. I am using clang to analysis the ARM binaries. The binary is 483.xalancbmk in CPU SPEC2006. When I use the optimization O0, no crash will occur. The crash occurs when I set optimization level as O1,O2,O3 and Os. If I have to recompile and rerun the tests. What version of llvm is suggested. It would be better if anyone could provide the patch on this

Hello, I wonder if it's possible to cross compile regular linux packages (autotools based) into llvm bitcode. Such bitcode could run on multiple target platforms using lli. So for example if we take 'tar' sources and compile them, we have 'tar' bitcode. We can run it using 'lli tar'. If it was possible in general, then probably building lots of linux packages could be

https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=6011 Summary: [PATCH] Fix autotools cross-compile support Product: rsync Version: 3.0.4 Platform: Other URL: http://blog.flameeyes.eu/s/canonical-target OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: core AssignedTo:

Hi Rafal, LLVM's bitcode is not target independent in the manner you're hoping for. You can't take bitcode generated for x86 and use it on ARM, for example, or bitcode generated for Linux and use it on Darwin. -Jim On Jun 18, 2011, at 4:10 PM, Rafal Rusin wrote: > Hello, > > I wonder if it's possible to cross compile regular linux packages > (autotools based) into

There should be a line-table entry for the end of the function, which appears to be missing from the dump you provided. llvm-dwarfdump should report this address with 'end_sequence' in the Flags. Are you using a different dumper? I am not sure but my guess would be that inline data is not represented in the line table. The line table's primary purpose is to inform the debugger

I'm not familiar with the target instruction set, but if "MOV PC, R0" is not a return instruction, I'm guessing that the sequence starting at A39C is a dispatch through a jump table. The jump table would be considered part of the instruction stream and included in the scope of the line table. This is not a case where you would see end_sequence; my mistake. The line table does

Hi Paul Thanks for your comments. Suppose I can generate the control flow graph via LLVM Pass or the default option like '-dot-cfg' with opt. However, the control flow graph is based on llvm IR level. I would like to have a control flow graph based on binary level. Thus, I want to map the IR to binary address. As far as I know, we used to use the debug information to map the IR to source

Hi However, frontend may also do various operations on the source code and one line number and column number could map to more than one binary address. Why LLVM IR cannot? Regrads Muhui 2018-06-12 23:18 GMT+08:00 mayuyu.io <admin at mayuyu.io>: > In theory that’s not exactly possible/accurate. Due to various operations > in the Backend like Instruction Legalization, one IR

Hi paulr Thanks for your reply. Though DWARF info give me the code address ranges, there might be inline data. If so, how to handle this case? As for the dwarf line table. Sometimes, the source line might be zero. Do you know why? If all instructions should be describe in the line table, I think analyzing Dwarf line table is enough to get all the instructions addresses. Do you agree? I would