similar to: [LLVMdev] PowerPC JIT available for testing

Le Sun, Nov 28, 2004 at 12:00:03PM -0600, Chris Lattner écrivait/wrote: > > > This is just a note to mention that the PowerPC JIT is now operational and > begging for testing in mainline CVS. There is one known problem (below), > but otherwise it works as well as the static PowerPC backend on the test > suite. [....] I'll be delighted to test it, but so fare I was not

On Sun, 2004-11-28 at 10:27, Basile STARYNKEVITCH wrote: > Le Sun, Nov 28, 2004 at 12:00:03PM -0600, Chris Lattner écrivait/wrote: > > > > > > This is just a note to mention that the PowerPC JIT is now operational and > > begging for testing in mainline CVS. There is one known problem (below), > > but otherwise it works as well as the static PowerPC backend on

FYI .. if you want to see how this works, check out lib/System/DynamicLibrary.cpp and platform versions of it. Reid. On Sun, 2004-11-28 at 10:03, Reid Spencer wrote: > Well, one of these days we'll be using libltdl (libtool's dynamic > library support) to make the interface to dynamic libraries consistent, > somewhat portable, and to get rid of system specific differences like

Well, one of these days we'll be using libltdl (libtool's dynamic library support) to make the interface to dynamic libraries consistent, somewhat portable, and to get rid of system specific differences like this. Reid. On Sun, 2004-11-28 at 10:00, Chris Lattner wrote: > Hi everyone, > > This is just a note to mention that the PowerPC JIT is now operational and > begging for

On Sun, 28 Nov 2004, Reid Spencer wrote: > FYI .. if you want to see how this works, check out > lib/System/DynamicLibrary.cpp and platform versions of it. Is it an option to use this interface now? How does libtool implement dlsym on darwin if not through the obvious interface? Can we just use whatever it uses? -Chris > On Sun, 2004-11-28 at 10:03, Reid Spencer wrote: > >

The DynamicLibrary.cpp code is written and I believe it to be complete, but it hasn't been tested much (at all). llvm-ld uses it to load its plug-in optimization module. The implementation will use ltdl library if its available, otherwise it tries to use dlopen/dlsym if they are available, otherwise you get a compile time warning and (void*)0 if you try to look up a symbol. I'm not sure

Dear All, I downloaded the latest CVS of llvm I want to try to use LLVM only for JIT only use (generating code in memory for x86 and, when available PowerPC [32bits]) How do I ./configure to avoid being asked about llvmgcc, which, in my very partial understanding, is only used to parse C code... If I understand correctly what Chris Lattner emailed me, LLVM uses only GCC frontend for C & C++

On Sun, Nov 07, 2004 at 10:33:09PM +0100, Basile STARYNKEVITCH wrote: > I want to try to use LLVM only for JIT only use (generating code in > memory for x86 and, when available PowerPC [32bits]) Cool! FYI, the PowerPC JIT needs work to make it operational, but the x86 JIT is good to go. > How do I ./configure to avoid being asked about llvmgcc, which, in my > very partial

Hello All Does any know about some opensource multithread-compatible (or concurrent) garbage collector library, if possible suitable for LLVM? (I mean that I want several mutator threads; the collector can be stoptheworld or concurrent ....) H.Boehm's conservative GC is multithread compatible, but seems quite slow (allocation is about the time of a C malloc). And it is well known that

https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=51144 Bug #: 51144 Summary: significant pixel corruption in text Classification: Unclassified Product: xorg Version: git Platform: x86-64 (AMD64) OS/Version: Linux (All) Status: NEW Severity: normal Priority: medium Component: Driver/nouveau

The release branch has been created and the llvm-gcc mirror updated (thanks Bill!). I will be doing some preliminary testing before I request the help of the community to test the release. During this time, I ask that developers only commit documentation changes to the release branch and email the list with any bug fixes that need to be merged into the release branch. Bug fixes have to be

Hello All, What version of g++ is usable to compile the latest LLVM CVS snapshot on a Linux/x86-64 (AMD64) Debian/ Sid or Etch plateform? What compiler do LLVM dzevelopers use to compile LLVM on Linux/X86-64 systems? IKt seems that most versions of g++ fail to compile LLVM and that some others compile it wrongly (producing buggy code)? Why can't g++-4.1 be used? FWIW, the latest gcc

Le Tue, May 08, 2007 at 10:17:41PM -0700, Tanya M. Lattner écrivait/wrote: > > Here is the schedule: > > May 7th - Release branch created. Developers should begin reviewing > all documentation. > > May 14th - Tar balls and binaries are released for general testing. I'll > also need volunteers to create additional llvm-gcc binaries that I have > not provided.

Hello All, On a Debian/AMD64 host I am surprised that there is apparently no way to generate position independent code in shared object (i.e. to output files which are easy dlopen-able without pain)? I probably missed something obvious, but what? I want to compile LLVM assembly source code -suitably generated- into .so as directly as possible... Regards -- Basile STARYNKEVITCH

Hello List, (apparently this list is moderated) Le/On Sun, Nov 07, 2004 at 03:45:41PM -0600, Misha Brukman écrivait/wrote: > On Sun, Nov 07, 2004 at 10:33:09PM +0100, Basile STARYNKEVITCH > wrote: Basile>> I want to try to use LLVM only for JIT only use (generating code in Basile>> memory for x86 and, when available PowerPC [32bits]) If you want to know I am experimenting

Le Thu, May 03, 2007 at 09:36:22AM -0700, Chris Lattner écrivait/wrote: > On Thu, 3 May 2007, Basile STARYNKEVITCH wrote: > > > > > FWIW, the latest gcc snapshot from yesterday gcc version 4.3.0 20070501 > > (experimental) fail to compile latest LLVM (with compile errors!). > > Please file an llvm bug report with these errors. It may be that we are > doing

Hello (my machine is a Debian/Sid/x86-64/Core2) Assuming I have one C source file chello.c, to compile it into a dynamically loadable thru dlopen shared object, I can run gcc -fPIC -shared -O chello.c -o chello.so I thought that, assuming I have one llvm source ehello.ll, the equivalent would be llvmc2 -opt ehello.ll -o ehello.so but it is not that simple. Any clues ? May I also

Hello, with the latest LLVM (almost 2.0 CVS) what is the right way to read a module from a byte array fetched from a database? I thought that I could subclass llbm::module to add my own fields (typically, a MySQL id number) and then parse it as bitcode, but I am stuck, since apparently the only way to parse bitcode is to use a BitcodeReader then calling materializeModule gives a fresh llvm

On Sun, Nov 07, 2004 at 11:04:58PM +0100, Basile STARYNKEVITCH wrote: > (apparently this list is moderated) Yes, we get too much spam, so it's moderated, but only with regard to spam, nothing else. > Basile>> I want to try to use LLVM only for JIT only use (generating > code in Basile>> memory for x86 and, when available PowerPC [32bits]) > > If you want to know

Thank you for this reply. If so, is there any way to merge basic blocks into a single one? Thanks, Seung J. Lee ---- Original message ---- >Date: Fri, 29 Jun 2007 22:27:38 +0200 >From: Basile STARYNKEVITCH <basile at starynkevitch.net> >Subject: Re: [LLVMdev] LLVM assembly without basic block >To: LLVM Developers Mailing List <llvmdev at cs.uiuc.edu> > >Seung