similar to: [LLVMdev] Building on OS X 10.4.0

Hi, I just wanted to doublecheck that the docs on the debugger intrinsics as seen on http://llvm.cs.uiuc.edu/docs/Sour ceLevelDebugging.html are out of date w.r.t. function types being displayed: ie, shouldn't %D1 = call {}* %llvm.dbg.func.start(%lldb.global* %d.main) be %D1 = call {}* (%lldb.global*)* %llvm.dbg.func.start(%lldb.global* %d.main) ? and, call {} *

Hi, I have a situation where I built an analysis pass as a loadable module, but I'd like to require it from other passes, to make it available if it's been loaded. Is there a clean way to do this, or am I stretching it too far? If there isn't a nice way, I'd be interested in discussion about what would be the least ugly hack just to get it working. Thanks! -mike -- Michael

A On 3/21/06, Michael McCracken <michael.mccracken at gmail.com> wrote: > On 3/21/06, Chris Lattner <sabre at nondot.org> wrote: > > On Mon, 20 Mar 2006, Michael McCracken wrote: > > > > > Hi, I'm trying to access an analysis pass from the Inliner pass, and > > > I'm having a lot of trouble getting that to work - I can verify that > >

I'm trying to generate the declarations for function intrinsics, and I must be misunderstanding how to create new functions - I saw that a function with no basic blocks is treated as a declaration, so I tried to just create one and add it to the globals list: llvm_type *structTy, *ptrToStructTy; structTy = llvm_type_create_struct(0, 0); structTy =

On Mon, 3 Apr 2006, Michael McCracken wrote: > the bytecode with lli - I get the following error: > > $ lli -load=/home/mmccrack/linux/lib/libTau.sh leo-inline-300-tau.bc > ERROR: Program used external function > '__llvm_cxxeh_allocate_exception' which could not be resolved! This is most likely because you are trying to link with llvmgcc, not with llvm-g++. Make sure that

Hi, I'm just getting back to working on the cfe debug info after a brief hiatus. It appears that the appropriate place to be inserting stoppoints is starting in llvm_expand_stmt, using STMT_LINENO(t) . If that's not the best place, comments would be appreciated. Using the debug_hooks seems to be a non-starter, because they're called during rtl generation, which apparently isn't

Hi, just a quick question about the intent of the ApproximateLoopSize() function in LoopUnroll.cpp: If a loop contains debug stoppoint intrinsics, does it make sense to count them? My understanding is that they are removed when not running under llvm-db anyway, so we probably shouldn't make size judgements based on them. Is that right, or am I missing something? Anyway, if I'm right,

Hi, I'm guessing that no one has tried this exact combination yet. I'm trying to build the gcc4.2 front end with current LLVM SVN on a G4 Powerbook running 10.4.10. I started with this: ../gcc4.2-trunk/configure --prefix=$HOME/Documents/hpcl/LLVM/llvm-gcc-4-2/install --enable-llvm=$HOME/Documents/hpcl/LLVM/llvm-svn-obj/ --with-gmp=$HOME/Documents/hpcl/LLVM/llvm-gcc-4-2/libdeps

Hi, I have a large-ish application I'm trying to build with LLVM, so I replaced g++ in the Makefiles with llvm-g++. This appears to work fine when I pass -Wl,-native to generate an ELF executable, but I want to control the inlining threshold it uses, so I am now passing -Wl,-disable-inlining and -Wa,-disable-inlining, and having it generate LLVM bytecode, then running opt -inlining to generate

Hi, I am trying to do something similar to the profiling target in the llvm-test suite makefiles, but I'm not a gmake expert, so I am stumped on something: I did some copy-and-paste of the profile code in llvm-test/Makefile.programs and got it working within SingleSource/Benchmarks, where I can say 'make pmf' or 'make profile' and get a build with profiling results or my own

I'm having troubles running the test suite on OS X 10.4. Inside my objdir, 'make check' gives this: % make check llvm[0]: Running test suite

Hi, I've got the cfe debug info to the point where it outputs correct function info, stoppoints for statements (but not for declarations anymore) and region ends at the beginning of the return block. So this is about as far as I wanted to go with it. However, there's one last big problem that I need some advice on. Running : gcc -g -S -o foo.ll llvmas foo.ll produces bytecode that works

Another option might be g95 instead of gfortran. I haven't used it for a while, but I seem to recall it working fine in gcc 4.0.1. On 9/11/06, Michael McCracken <michael.mccracken at gmail.com> wrote: > On 9/9/06, Michael McCracken <michael.mccracken at gmail.com> wrote: > > On 9/9/06, Steven Bosscher <stevenb.gcc at gmail.com> wrote: > > > On 9/9/06, Chris

OK, I noticed a few problems with my previous email, so I will boil the question down: What I want to do is compile for x86 and ia64 from darwin. I also want to load my own passes into opt and llc. Should I be using llvmc at all here, or should I be doing something like llvmgcc -> gccas -> opt -> llc ? I've given up on the filetype=obj argument, so now the problem is that llc is

Hi, I'm using LLVM as part of my thesis project and wanted to let the community know about it. (And get your feedback :) The project is called LENS. It's a file format and a framework for storing generic information about a program based on the control structure of the program, and quickly building tools to interact with that data. It might be best to think of the format as an external

On 9/1/06, Michael McCracken <michael.mccracken at gmail.com> wrote: > On 9/1/06, Chris Lattner <sabre at nondot.org> wrote: > > On Fri, 1 Sep 2006, Michael McCracken wrote: [snip] > Now f951 doesn't crash when compiling, but still can't compile the > libgfortran files. It now finds some syntax errors in a generated file > that's part of the intrinsics

I just noticed this - I can't promise any particular amount of TLC, but I'll certainly be giving the Fortran front-end some attention as soon as LLVM moves to gcc 4.2. For future reference, does anyone know of a good free Fortran compiler test suite? Cheers, -mike On 5/14/07, Duncan Sands <baldrick at free.fr> wrote: > Hi Duraid, > > > Does anyone know what the

On 9/9/06, Michael McCracken <michael.mccracken at gmail.com> wrote: > On 9/9/06, Steven Bosscher <stevenb.gcc at gmail.com> wrote: > > On 9/9/06, Chris Lattner <sabre at nondot.org> wrote: > > > On Sat, 9 Sep 2006, Steven Bosscher wrote: > > > > You wrote: > > > >> The NIST F77 test suite doesn't seem to be compatible with

Hi - I wanted to make a pass available for use with llc, and found that even though there is a PassInfo::LLC value, it isn't currently used. If you compare analyze.cpp and opt.cpp to llc.cpp, the first two find appropriate pass names with a FilteredPassNameParser and create them, but llc does not - it just gets all the passes it wants through the TargetMachine. Is there a particular reason

OK, that explains it. I probably didn't have runtest installed the last time I ran configure, and re-syncing with CVS also caused it to reconfigure, solving the problem but confusing me. Thanks, -mike On 8/24/05, Chris Lattner <sabre at nondot.org> wrote: > On Wed, 24 Aug 2005, Michael McCracken wrote: > > I'm mostly up to date, but not completely current with CVS. Is this