Displaying 20 results from an estimated 2000 matches similar to: "[LLVMdev] Re: LLVM JIT questions"
2006 Nov 28
2
[LLVMdev] question about the LLVM JIT
<cc'ing llvmdev>
On Tue, 28 Nov 2006, Eric van Riet Paap wrote:
> I'm working on using the LLVM JIT in PyPy and I hop you can give me a few
> hint.
ok
> I have some things working at and try to write C++ code for what I need
> from Python. The unittest I am working on at the moment is looks like
> this
>
> --- Python code...
> llglobalmul4 =
2006 Apr 13
2
[LLVMdev] standalone llvm
On Wed, 12 Apr 2006 23:02:12 -0500 (CDT)
Chris Lattner <sabre at nondot.org> wrote:
>
> > I'd like to directly create executable code that i can
> > stick in memory somewhere and jump into (call).
>
> Take a look at the llvm/examples directory. There are several small
> programs that create LLVM IR on the fly and JIT compile it.
I'm trying to take
2006 Apr 14
2
[LLVMdev] Re: standalone llvm
On Thu, 13 Apr 2006 18:07:42 +0200
Oscar Fuentes <oscarfv at telefonica.net> wrote:
>
> Simon Burton <simon at arrowtheory.com> writes:
>
> > I'm trying to take assembly and create machine code I can execute.
> > How close am I ?
>
> Your test case is not complete. Besides, which version of llvm are you
> using? What are the commands for compiling
2006 May 05
0
[LLVMdev] ExecutionEngine blew the stack ?
On Fri, 5 May 2006 01:19:08 -0500 (CDT)
Chris Lattner <sabre at nondot.org> wrote:
>
> On Fri, 5 May 2006, Simon Burton wrote:
> > This leads me to my next question: as I make more and more functions
> > with the EE, it slows down. I am re-using the Module, ExistingModuleProvider,
> > and ExecutionEngine, and pumping the parser like so:
> > M =
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
2006 Nov 29
0
[LLVMdev] question about the LLVM JIT
>> <snip>.
>> void add_global_mapping(const char* name, void* address) {
>> GlobalVariable var(Type::IntTy, false,
>> GlobalVariable::ExternalLinkage, 0, name, gp_module);
>> gp_execution_engine->addGlobalMapping(&var, address);
>> }
>
> This is creating a new global variable on the stack, instead of
> finding the existing
2005 Aug 29
0
[LLVMdev] PyPy release 0.7.0 announcement
pypy-0.7.0: first PyPy-generated Python Implementations
==============================================================
What was once just an idea between a few people discussing
on some nested mailing list thread and in a pub became reality ...
the PyPy development team is happy to announce its first
public release of a fully translatable self contained Python
implementation. The 0.7 release
2005 Nov 03
0
[LLVMdev] PyPy 0.8 release announcement
Hello LLVM-ers,
Below you will a description of our new PyPy release, a project which
(among many other things)generates one of the largest .ll files in
existance. :-)
This .ll gets compiled with the LLVM toolchain into a standalone
executable of the Python language.
I hope you find this interesting!
cheers,
Eric van Riet Paap
==============================================================
2006 May 05
1
[LLVMdev] ExecutionEngine blew the stack ?
On Fri, 5 May 2006 16:43:13 +1000
Simon Burton <simon at arrowtheory.com> wrote:
>
> It slows in the construction phase, so one of these calls:
> M = ParseAssemblyString(AsmString, M);
> verifyModule( *M )
> M->getNamedFunction(name);
> EE->getPointerToFunction
>
> It feels like there is a linear name lookup going on somewhere.
it's
2013 Nov 21
1
[LLVMdev] Replacing C-style function
Hi,
I am trying to replace a c-style function with another function with same
signature. Consider the following code:
std::stringstream main_c;
main_c
<<"#include <stdio.h>\n"
<<"extern \"C\" { \n"
<<"int print1()\n"
<<"{\n"
<<" printf(\"Inside
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.
2006 Mar 27
3
[LLVMdev] PyPy Tokyo sprint 23/4 - 29/4 announcement
Hello LLVM,
During this sprint we will also look at using LLVM JIT for our project.
What exactly we will do in Tokyo very much depends on who will
attend. So if you are interested please contact me beforehand so we
can make sure everyone will have a fun and productive time.
cheers,
Eric van Riet Paap
Tokyo PyPy Sprint: 23rd - 29th April 2006
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
2011 Dec 29
2
[LLVMdev] How to free memory of JIT'd function
Hi,
I'm testing how to free memory of a JIT'd function.
I thought ExecutionEngine::freeMachineCodeForFunction() and
Function::eraseFromParent()
would work and did a test with the following sample code.
But I found that the memory usage of the process is constantly growing as
the while loop goes.
Could someone shed light on this please?
Here is the code.
int main(int argc, char **argv) {
2012 Jan 05
0
[LLVMdev] How to free memory of JIT'd function
Hi,
I put the sample code and a brief analysis using Valgrind to GitHub
in order to make my problem clear.
https://github.com/naosuke/how-to-free-memory-of-JIT-function
The Valgrind heap profiler indicates memory leaking but I don't get
what is wrong with the way to free memory.
If someone could please offer some advice/suggestion on this, I would
really appreciate it.
Best,
Naosuke
On
2007 Oct 19
0
[LLVMdev] OCaml Install Error
Hi,
this looks very promising. Do you have any plans to add bindings for
the use of an ExecutionEngine, especially recompileAndRelinkFunction?
I've build an interactive toplevel implemented in OCaml and I have to
pull of some stunts to be able to change the definition of a
function. (emit a .ll file containing the code, looking up the
function and calling removeBody, then reading
2005 Dec 23
0
[LLVMdev] if's to switch transformation?
On Fri, 23 Dec 2005, Eric van Riet Paap wrote:
> I few days ago I had some code (for the PyPy project) that llc -march=c
> converted to a switch statement and gcc compiled that nicely to a jumptable
> in the .s file. Now I try to reproduce when directly going from a .ll to a .s
> file. But I now see a long list of compare and jumps instead of the
> jumptable. Is there a
2005 Dec 23
2
[LLVMdev] if's to switch transformation?
hello everyone,
I few days ago I had some code (for the PyPy project) that llc -
march=c converted to a switch statement and gcc compiled that nicely
to a jumptable in the .s file. Now I try to reproduce when directly
going from a .ll to a .s file. But I now see a long list of compare
and jumps instead of the jumptable. Is there a transformation that
does this if->switch(ing) or is
2012 Jan 10
1
[LLVMdev] How to free memory of JIT'd function
There may be another explanation, but I've seen this sort of issues before: LLVM uses several object pools (associated w/ LLVM context and JIT engine), and often objects from these pools are leaked, or the pools grow infinitely due to implementation bugs.
These are not an ordinary memory leaks, as destroying the LLVM context and/or JIT engine will successfully reclaim all the memory. The
2006 May 05
2
[LLVMdev] ExecutionEngine blew the stack ?
On Fri, 5 May 2006, Simon Burton wrote:
> This leads me to my next question: as I make more and more functions
> with the EE, it slows down. I am re-using the Module, ExistingModuleProvider,
> and ExecutionEngine, and pumping the parser like so:
> M = ParseAssemblyString(AsmString, M);
> ISTM that there should be a way of creating multiple modules/EEs but I ran
> into trouble