similar to: [LLVMdev] New support for variable argument functions & intrinsic functions

Provide a full-fledged example of working variable arguments on X86_64, since it's easily the most popular platform. Cc: Reid Kleckner <rnk at google.com> Signed-off-by: Ramkumar Ramachandra <artagnon at gmail.com> --- docs/LangRef.rst | 44 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-------------- 1 file changed, 30 insertions(+), 14 deletions(-) diff --git a/docs/LangRef.rst

Thanks for responding, Duncan, and clarifying that y'all need more info to help. I'm trying to compile binaries on os x 10.5.8 intel hardware that are compatible on ppc os x 10.4. When I include various flags to llvm-gcc, including: -m32 -arch ppc -isysroot /Developer/SDKs/MacOS10.4u.sdk -mmacosx-version-min=10.4 I am seeing errors when compiling using llvm-gcc 4.2. If I leave out

# The future of the va_arg instruction ## Summary LLVM IR currently defines a va_arg instruction, which can be used to access a vararg. Few Clang targets make use of it, and it has a number of limitations. This RFC hopes to promote discussion on its future - how 'smart' should va_arg be? Should we be aiming to transition all targets and LLVM frontends to using it? ## Background on va_arg

Hi everyone, Currently, when declaring a va_list in llvm, one only needs to do: %ap = alloca i8 * (Reference : llvm/docs/LangRef.html#int_varargs) This is OK for x86 and PPC/Darwin ABI because a va_list in these architectures is just a pointer to the stack. The va_start intrinsic just initializes where the pointer points at in the stack. I do not know how the other backends operate, but I

On 4/2/07, Nicolas Geoffray <nicolas.geoffray at lip6.fr> wrote: > Hi everyone, > > Currently, when declaring a va_list in llvm, one only needs to do: > > %ap = alloca i8 * (Reference : llvm/docs/LangRef.html#int_varargs) This example is x86 specific. alpha allocas an {sbyte*, int} (and does so in llvm-gcc). What the type of the alloca to use is requires the frontend to

Hi, So the Variable Argument Handling Intrinsics section of the LangRef (http://llvm.org/docs/LangRef.html#variable-argument-handling-intrinsics) lists an example that segfaults. Try the following on x86_64: -- 8< -- define i32 @test(i32 %X, ...) { ; Initialize variable argument processing %ap = alloca i8* %ap2 = bitcast i8** %ap to i8* call void @llvm.va_start(i8* %ap2) ; Read a

Hi Andrew, Andrew Lenharth wrote: > On 4/2/07, Nicolas Geoffray <nicolas.geoffray at lip6.fr> wrote: > >> Hi everyone, >> >> Currently, when declaring a va_list in llvm, one only needs to do: >> >> %ap = alloca i8 * (Reference : llvm/docs/LangRef.html#int_varargs) >> > > This example is x86 specific. alpha allocas an {sbyte*, int}

I'm generating code for a target that only supports i32 natively. My front end is generating VAARG for accessing varargs parameters. The problem is that I get an assert when I compile this: #include <stdarg.h> int main(va_list ap) { typedef double type; type tmp; tmp = va_arg(ap, type); } Bitcode: ; ModuleID = 't0056.bc' target datalayout =

Hello, LLVMers! How can I force a front end to generate VAARG for accessing varargs parameters? I compile a simple C-code: #include <stdarg.h> int FnVarArgs(int a, ...) { int i,tmp=0; va_list ptArgument; va_start(ptArgument,a); for(i=0;i<9;i++) tmp+= va_arg(ptArgument,int); return tmp; } And then have this bytecode: ; ModuleID = 'main.bc' target

On 02/01/2010 01:13 PM, Kristaps Straupe wrote: > Hello again! > > We have fetched the latest llvm sources from repository and the > original problem has went away. Though now we are facing a new problem > with interpreter on the following c code: > > -------------- > #include <stdarg.h> > #include <stdio.h> > > void doTheThing(int dummy, ...) > {

I have a question about a problem I came across while I was adding support for aggregate va_arg expression in clang. The following is the example program I will use in this email. I compile the program with clang targeting mips. Note that I have not pushed all the changes I have made yet, so you will not be able to see the same results. $ clang -ccc-host-triple mipsel-unknown-linux

doc/Makefile.am | 1 doc/swfdec-sections.txt | 3 libswfdec/swfdec_as_array.c | 1 libswfdec/swfdec_as_boolean.c | 2 libswfdec/swfdec_as_internal.h | 4 libswfdec/swfdec_as_native_function.c | 156 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ libswfdec/swfdec_as_native_function.h | 21 ++++ libswfdec/swfdec_as_number.c

Hi Richard, I tried latest 3.7.1 release, the clang has same build failure and don’t know __builtin_ms_va_list at all. I compared the llvm trunk with 3.7.1 and find the trunk has a VA commit from Davis which is not included in the 3.7.1 release. So, I guess I need to directly build the latest trunk instead of the 3.7.1 release. (why 3.7.1 release doesn’t include this patch?) commit

At the LLVM Developers' Meeting in November, I promised to work on isolating a subset of the current test suite that is useful for benchmarking. Having looked at this in more detail, most of the applications and benchmarks in the test suite are useful for benchmarking, and so I think that a better way of phrasing it is that we should construct a list of programs in the test suite that are not

I would like to be able to instrument va_arg, but when I generate a bc file for a test case using: llvm-gcc -O3 -emit-llvm vararg.c -c -o vararg.bc I do not see va_arg. Instead, it seems the args are accessed through %struct.__va_list_tag, which makes things a bit trickier to instrument. Is there a way to force llvm-gcc to use va_arg? Perhaps there is some documentation about va_list_tag or

Dear all, Is there a way to have llvm-gcc output the llvm va_arg intrinsic? As far as I understand, llvm-gcc directly lowers va_arg in the frontend using the TARGET_GIMPLIFY_VA_ARG target hook. I am aware that va_arg segfaults on x86-64 (http://llvm.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=1740) and that llvm-gcc avoids this issue by always lowering calls to va_arg

This allows you to copy an environ, while optionally adding extra (key, value) pairs to it. --- common/utils/Makefile.am | 2 + common/utils/utils.h | 1 + common/utils/environ.c | 116 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ 3 files changed, 119 insertions(+) diff --git a/common/utils/Makefile.am b/common/utils/Makefile.am index 9a78339d..41761c79 100644 --- a/common/utils/Makefile.am

Target: FreeBSD 6.2-STABLE on i386 autoconf says: configure:2122: checking build system type configure:2140: result: i386-unknown-freebsd6.2 [...] configure:2721: gcc -v >&5 Using built-in specs. Configured with: FreeBSD/i386 system compiler Thread model: posix gcc version 3.4.6 [FreeBSD] 20060305 [...] objdir != srcdir, for both llvm and gcc. Release build. llvm-gcc 4.2 from source.

Hi Richard, Thank you for the info. I build my code in Ubuntu-64bits with simply commands: “clang X64.c”, then run “./a.out” to see the output. If I replace my va_list, va_start, va_arg va_end with __builtin_ms_va_list, __builtin_ms_va_start, __builtin_ms_va_arg, __builtin_ms_va_end, my code will build fail in Ubuntu with below message. Do you suggest I should build it in windows and not in

Hi, LLVM 2.1-pre1 test results: Linux (SUSE) on x86 (P4) Release mode, but with assertions enabled LLVM srcdir == objdir # of expected passes 2250 # of expected failures 5 I ran the llvm-test suite on my desktop while I was also working on that PC, so don't put too much trust in the timing info. Especially during the "spiff" test the machine was swapping