similar to: [LLVMdev] Re:About the address of Basic Block

Hi, I want to explorer affection of compiler on low power. For the project background, I tend to process this work via LLVM, rather than GCC. And the Target is ARM. For this purpose, clang(3.2) + arm-gcc + simplescalar-arm(and panalyzer) seems to be a good choice. But I encounter several problems in the processing of setup the environment. ---------------------------------- 1. Firstly, arm

It use to. alphasim (the validated alpha model based on simplescalar) is better though. Also, since no one has needed to run simplescalar experiments, the alpha backend has bitrotted some. The last version that I know worked with most of spec was llvm 1.8 or so. You need to get or write an elf64 loader and fix a couple instruction implementations in simplescalar to get it to run linux binaries

Simplescalar is not compatible with llvm because the binutils simplescalar is based on is ancient. Jim On Sep 26, 2012, at 12:21 AM, 陳奕梅 <ymchen at sslab.cs.nctu.edu.tw> wrote: > Dear all > > I use arm-linux-gcc 2.95.2, because the code generated by version 3.X and 4.X can not run on SimpleScalar. > So I use the arm-linux-gcc 2.95.2 *only*, the version is recommended by

We are using simplescalar 3.0 as an architecture simulation platform for our research. The current version of the simplescalar still uses gnu binutils 1.5. and gcc-2.7.2 to generate 32bit mips code. We are currently trying to replace gcc-2.7.2 by LLVM current. However, the generated code cannot be processed by this old binutils-1.5. We expect that it can be quite difficult to make simplescalar use

Dear all I use arm-linux-gcc 2.95.2, because the code generated by version 3.X and 4.X can not run on SimpleScalar. So I use the arm-linux-gcc 2.95.2 *only*, the version is recommended by SimpleScalar. The code generated by arm-linux-gcc 2.95.2 can run on SimpleScalar. Now I want to use llvm/clang to generate ARM assembly code and arm-linux-gcc 2.95.2 to be assembler. Unfortunately, I got some

Thank you for your answers and suggestions! Well, I want to do some experiments about the compiler optimization in llvm under SPM and I need performance evaluation. As I know, alpha is a general-purpose CPU, so I consider that arm may be an alternative. Simplesim-arm is able to do performance simulation while m5-arm is still under development. Then, what should I do? Do the experiment under

I am using SimpleScalar cross-compiler 2.95.2 ( http://www.simplescalar.com/v4test.html) On Thu, Jun 18, 2009 at 3:30 PM, Anton Korobeynikov <anton at korobeynikov.info > wrote: > Hello > > > hello.s:6: Error: Unknown pseudo-op: `.eabi_attribute' > How old is your arm toolchain? > > -- > With best regards, Anton Korobeynikov > Faculty of Mathematics and

On the pervious mail, I am trying to add label for each basic basic because I think I could get address by using nm if nm can show the address of each label, but it seems not . so do you guys have some idea how to get address for each basic block? Thanks. >I am trying to get the memory address of each basic block. So far I am trying to add the label >into each basic block, actually I need

hello everyone, I'm wondering whether llvm can work together with simplescalar. Would anyone please give me some clarification? Thanks a lot!

hello everyone, I'm wondering whether llvm can work together with simplescalar. Would anyone please give me some clarification? Thanks a lot!

Qiuyu, The dynamic optimization project (an internal research project in our group) uses some way to map LLVM basic blocks to native code addresses. If this is what you want, perhaps you can ask Brian Gaeke (gaeke at uiuc.edu) to give you some information about how that is done. --Vikram http://www.cs.uiuc.edu/~vadve http://llvm.cs.uiuc.edu/ On Aug 19, 2004, at 5:11 PM, Misha Brukman

Hi, I am interested in the JIT compiler of llvm, namely, lli. I want to know more about it, but I found little documentation about it. There are a few paragraphs about JIT in the CGO paper, a list of options dumped from "lli --help-hidden", and a short webpage of lli in the website. But many issues are not clearly described. For example, 1. When JIT is available

Hello, I have solved this problem in the splay mp3 decoder with this: In the header: #if (__GNUC__ < 2 || ( __GNUC__ == 2 && __GNUC_MINOR__ < 91 ) ) #warning "inline code disabled! (buggy egcs version)" #undef __NO_MATH_INLINES #define __NO_MATH_INLINES 1 #endif #include <math.h> In the makefile: CXXFLAGS=@CXXFLAGS@ -fno-strength-reduce (Opt level is 2) and

On Sunday 15 June 2008 22:30, Andrew Lenharth wrote: > It use to. alphasim (the validated alpha model based on simplescalar) > is better though. Also, since no one has needed to run simplescalar > experiments, the alpha backend has bitrotted some. The last version > that I know worked with most of spec was llvm 1.8 or so. You need to > get or write an elf64 loader and fix a

On Thu, Aug 19, 2004 at 01:13:42PM -0700, Zhang Qiuyu wrote: > On the pervious mail, I am trying to add label for each basic basic > because I think I could get address by using nm if nm can show the > address of each label, but it seems not . so do you guys have some > idea how to get address for each basic block? Thanks. LLVM does not have a notion of C-style 'labels' that

> I am using SimpleScalar cross-compiler 2.95.2 (http://www.simplescalar.com/v4test.html) It's really ancient. Consider upgrading to something not from stone age :) I doubt you'll be able to assemble anything generated by, for example, with mainline gcc. -- With best regards, Anton Korobeynikov Faculty of Mathematics and Mechanics, Saint Petersburg State University

I'd be interested to hear how that's being done - if Brian would reply to the list about it, I'd appreciate it. -mike On Aug 19, 2004, at 3:39 PM, Vikram S. Adve wrote: > Qiuyu, > > The dynamic optimization project (an internal research project in our > group) uses some way to map LLVM basic blocks to native code > addresses. If this is what you want, perhaps you

On Wed, 6 Oct 2004, Reid Spencer wrote: > This file (UnixLocalInferiorProcess.cpp) is due for porting and placement in > lib/System but I haven't gotten there yet. If you come up with something that > works on MINGW, please let me know. As you might guess by the name, this file is essentially entirely unix specific. The debugger is designed so that multiple backends can be plugged

> According to the link, I found that during the compiling process, the option "-emit-llvm" must be added to generate immediate object *.o. > [hanfeng at os-wstation02 fft]llvm-gcc -c fft.c -emit-llvm "-emit-llvm" emits object file which contains LLVM bitcode (IR). Default file name suffix is .o, but you might want to use "-o fft.bc" to make the suffix

wow... Tell me, what cross compiler can I use for ARM if I am working in a i686-Linux machine? At the same time, how I can simulate it? But the way, If I deleted the unknown pseudo-op and change section .rodata definition, I can use my stone age cross compiler. I am just wondering why it works without them. Thanks in advance. On Thu, Jun 18, 2009 at 4:26 PM, Anton Korobeynikov <anton at