Displaying 20 results from an estimated 2000 matches similar to: "Fwd: Re: [LLVMdev] new IA64 backend"
2005 Mar 17
0
[LLVMdev] new IA64 backend
On Fri, 2005-03-18 at 05:04 +0900, Duraid Madina wrote:
> 	I've just checked in an IA64 backend to LLVM!
Woo hoo!  And There Was Much Rejoicing in IA64 Land :-).
-- 
Ciao,
al
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Al Stone                                      Alter Ego:
Linux & Open Source Lab                       Debian Developer
Hewlett-Packard
2005 Mar 17
4
[LLVMdev] new IA64 backend
Hi everyone,
	I've just checked in an IA64 backend to LLVM! Be warned, it's pretty 
rough right now. Here are some of the known defects:
	- No varargs
	- No alloca
	- No instruction scheduling/bundling of any sort
	...or in other words, it breaks often and when it does work, it's a 
dog. On the plus side, it _does_ have a tasty new pattern instruction 
selector. :) Beyond fixing the
2005 May 11
0
[LLVMdev] LLVM 1.5 Release Plan
Hello Duraid,
Duraid Madina wrote on Wednesday, 11 May 2005:
>> I've just tried building CVS/HEAD of llvm using gcc 4.0.0 that I
>> have installed to /opt/gcc
> ... then you should either add /opt/gcc/lib to /etc/ld.so.conf and
> rerun ldconfig, or add /opt/gcc/lib to your LD_LIBRARY_PATH .
> However, GCC 4.x definitely has issues building LLVM, at least on
> ia64.
Oh,
2005 Mar 17
0
[LLVMdev] new IA64 backend
On Fri, 2005-03-18 at 05:04 +0900, Duraid Madina wrote:
> Hi everyone,
> 
> 	I've just checked in an IA64 backend to LLVM! Be warned, it's pretty 
> rough right now. Here are some of the known defects:
> 
> 	- No varargs
What are your issues here?  Or are they simply at the "not implemented
so I don't know" stage?  Namely, I am working on some varargs
2004 Dec 30
0
[LLVMdev] Primer with LLVM
On Thu, 2004-12-30 at 11:14, Francisco Puentes wrote:
> Hi, everybody:
> 
Hi Francisco
> 
> I am a beginner with LLVM, in fact today was the first day that I use it.
Welcome!
> 
> I have several questions about LLVM:
If you haven't already, a good place to start is the Getting Started
Guide, at http://llvm.cs.uiuc.edu/docs/GettingStarted.html 
> Can I use LLVM to
2005 Mar 18
2
[LLVMdev] new IA64 backend
Andrew Lenharth wrote:
> On Fri, 2005-03-18 at 05:04 +0900, Duraid Madina wrote:
>>	- No varargs
> 
> What are your issues here?  Or are they simply at the "not implemented
> so I don't know" stage?
The two bugs I mentioned (no varargs, no alloca) are pretty much two 
sides of the same coin: I'm ignoring the IA64 stack frame layout (for no 
good reason), so
2005 May 11
3
[LLVMdev] LLVM 1.5 Release Plan
Oleg Smolsky wrote:
> I've just tried building CVS/HEAD of llvm using gcc 4.0.0 that I have
> installed to /opt/gcc
... then you should either add /opt/gcc/lib to /etc/ld.so.conf and rerun 
ldconfig, or add /opt/gcc/lib to your LD_LIBRARY_PATH . However, GCC 4.x 
definitely has issues building LLVM, at least on ia64. If you want to 
use LLVM in anger, I'd stick with 3.4 for now.
2005 May 25
3
[LLVMdev] llc -march=ia64 support
You are right, the machine I am on is a AMD Opteron. I could probably
generate working code for x86, but I am testing the implications of
using 64 bits integers. The four weeks is not really important, it's
just that it would be nice to have really fast code to showcase.
Something related to this: to test the effect of 64 bits integers I
replace all reference of int by long in my .ll file.
2004 Nov 30
2
[LLVMdev] dejagnu tester
Hi all,
	This is just to announce that I have a FreeBSD x86 machine running the 
test suite more or less continuously:
	http://kinoko.c.u-tokyo.ac.jp/~builddonkey/
	Of note is that it now runs Dejagnu tests. (Thanks, tonic+co!) I'm also 
tracking CVS breakage (internally, for now). At some later point, I'll 
make available more real-time information on "is CVS alive and if not, 
2005 Mar 18
0
[LLVMdev] new IA64 backend
On Fri, 18 Mar 2005, Duraid Madina wrote:
>>> 	- No instruction scheduling/bundling of any sort
>> 
>> So this one needs to be coordinated.  Next week, I might see about
>> adding MachineInstruction support to the SelectionDAG so you can load up
>> a DAG post-ISel and then spit it back out scheduled.
>
> That would be much appreciated, particularly if it
2005 May 25
0
[LLVMdev] llc -march=ia64 support
Hi there,
	The IA64 architecture, which had its 'official' name changed to the 
"Itanium Processor Architecture", *is* supported by llc. I am pretty 
sure you are talking about the x86-64 architecture, which has also had 
its share of unfortunate name changes and is also known as "AMD64", 
"EM64T" and all sorts of things in between. x86-64 is *not* currently 
2005 May 18
0
[LLVMdev] Testing Release 1.5
> Itanium
Everything checks out as expected. :)
	Duraid
2004 Dec 30
3
[LLVMdev] Primer with LLVM
Hi, everybody:
I am a beginner with LLVM, in fact today was the first day that I use it.
I have several questions about LLVM:
Can I use LLVM to compile several files (bytecode), scripts (char*) and link
them with external libraries generating *only* one executable (all in
memory)?
Can I invoke externals functions from a guest (LLVM generated) code which
exist in the host code (the code that
2005 Jan 10
4
[LLVMdev] Version Control Upgrade?
I have used Perforce also and fully agree it's wonderful.  The only 
concern I have is with their license for open source projects.  The only 
gotcha is that it must be renewed annually, and they reserve the right 
to not renew it (though they say they won't unreasonably deny 
renewals).  Not sure how much this really matters, as Perforce strikes 
me as being one of those "do no
2005 May 25
2
[LLVMdev] llc -march=ia64 support
Hi,
For the PyPy project ( http://codespeak.net/pypy ) I am working on the
x64-64 support.
I would like to use llc -march=ia64 to generate the assembly but that is
not supported at the moment.
As a workaround I let llc generate C code that gets compiled, but this
unfortunately is not a good way
to show the power of llvm. A understood this ia64 support will be worked
on soon.
First week of july
2005 Feb 14
0
LLVM February Status Update
Hi Everyone,
Sorry for the long overdue status update, as you might guess, the holidays
have been busy for everyone. :)
Here's your periodic dose of updates on the progress of LLVM, which takes
us from the LLVM 1.4 release until present CVS.  I appologize if I forgot 
anything!
Big Things:
  1. Brian contributed a new SparcV8 backend, which (unlike the SparcV9
     backend) uses the
2005 Jan 09
0
[LLVMdev] Version Control Upgrade?
Hi everyone,
Reid said:
> Of the tools available, it seems that only subversion, arch, and 
> monotone are suitable for our purposes. But, we'd love to hear your 
> thoughts; especially if you have first-hand experience with these tools.
Apart from using CVS as a client (as everyone does), I've only ever used 
Aegis (previous employer, for ~3 years) and Perforce (the employer 
2007 Jun 22
3
[LLVMdev] BigBlock register allocator
Hi everyone,
Quick summary:
	LLVM now has a new register allocator particularly suitable for 
compiling (very) large, machine-generated functions.
Longer story:
	I've recently been using LLVM in an application that involves JITing 
fairly large functions that have no control flow - they're just flat 
sequences of instructions, anywhere from 100 to 10000+ in size. (The 
control flow is
2004 Dec 31
4
[LLVMdev] Primer with LLVM
Hi again, and thanks (Reid) for your fast response:
Yes, it works!!! Only changing the order of libraries in the Makefile.
Nowaday I have my software with the capability of compile assembly, bytecode
(from buffer and file) and link them with a set of libraries. It seems to
work perfectly (I don't generate code yet).
My real aim is to have a process (host) with execute several no-jit
2005 May 17
4
[LLVMdev] Testing Release 1.5
Dear All,
I've finished building binaries for the GCC frontends and am now testing
  the 1.5 release branch on i386/Linux, Sparc/Solaris, and PowerPC/MacOS X.
I'm looking for volunteers to test LLVM 1.5 on platforms that we don't
have in house.  I'm specifically looking for people who can do:
Itanium
FreeBSD/i386
Windows (Cygwin, MingW, etc)
I'm mainly interested in major