similar to: [LLVMdev] writing transforms newbie question

Is it possible to get llvm to generate native machine code without using gcc and friends ? Do I use lli ? I'd like to directly create executable code that i can stick in memory somewhere and jump into (call). (I'm looking to use llvm in a BSD licensed project). Simon. -- Simon Burton, B.Sc. Licensed PO Box 8066 ANU Canberra 2601 Australia Ph. 61 02 6249 6940 http://arrowtheory.com

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

Is it safe to use the LLVM cfrontend 1.6 with LLVM 1.7 or the latest LLVM from CVS? I am running OS X 10.3.9, which I believe corresponds to Darwin kernel version 7.9.0. When I tried to use the 1.7 cfrontend, I could not get LLVM 1.7 or the LLVM from CVS to compile. However, when I used the 1.6 cfrontend (which is additionally labeled Darwin 7.9.0), I was able to get them to compile.

Hi, I'm building a little JIT that creates functions to do array manipulations, eg. sum all the elements of a double* array. I'm writing this in python, generating llvm assembly intructions and piping that through a call to ParseAssemblyString, ExecutionEngine, etc. It's working OK on integer values, but i'm getting nasty floating point exceptions when i try this on double*

On Tue, 20 Jun 2006, Chris Lattner wrote: > On Wed, 21 Jun 2006, Simon Burton wrote: >> This from the output: >> >> 24620 x86-emitter - Number of machine instructions emitted >> >> (i had to write a dummy main function to get this to work) >> >> Is this really the number of bytes of machine code ? > Yes. To be specific, this is the

Simon Burton <simon at arrowtheory.com> writes: > Hi, > > I've read over the "LLVM Language Reference Manual" > a few times, and writing some ll code, but i'm stuck at > a very basic point. How to decrement a counter variable ? > > int %count(int %n) { > EntryBlock: > %cond = seteq int %n, 0 > br bool %cond, label %Exit, label %Next >

On Sat, 15 Apr 2006 07:47:00 +0200 Oscar Fuentes <oscarfv at telefonica.net> wrote: > > BTW, Simon, is there a reason for writing LLVM assembler and not > generating LLVM code directly? You mean write C++ code that calls the LLVM library ? I have a mild C++ allergy that I don't wish to aggravate. > The later is simpler and relieves you > from some nasty burdens. Yes,

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 =

Segfault in EE->getPointerToFunction. I think it's blown the stack, gdb reports a never ending backtrace (below). I generate llvm assembly and parse/verify OK. Attached is the assembly. It is the smallest example generated that causes the segfault. If this EE uses a recursive function (??), it seems an inherent limitation in how big llvm functions can be. Simon. gdb backtrace: #0

On Tue, 18 Apr 2006 23:27:39 -0700 Evan Cheng <evan.cheng at apple.com> wrote: > Hi Simon, > > The x86 backend does generate scalar SSE2 instructions. For your > example, it should emit something like: Oh, how did you get this ? [...] > > There is nothing here that should cause an exception. Are you using a > release or cvs? CVS. >From what I remember,

On Fri, 14 Apr 2006 03:25:39 +0200 Oscar Fuentes <oscarfv at telefonica.net> wrote: ... > Simon, > > With a fresh CVS checkout, I've tried your test case on Windows/VC++ > and it works ok. Too bad that I have not access to a Linux machine > right now. I'll like to see what's wrong with your test case. > > What you get from running the test case under gdb

On Tue, 20 Jun 2006 22:38:24 -0500 (CDT) Chris Lattner <sabre at nondot.org> wrote: > > >> Is this really the number of bytes of machine code ? > > Yes. > > To be specific, this is the number of bytes of machine code JIT'd. Thus, > this only includes the stuff reachable from main, for example. To see > specifically what functions it is compiling and

Hi, Is there a way to find out how much memory some JIT'ed machine code uses ? Simon. -- Simon Burton, B.Sc. Licensed PO Box 8066 ANU Canberra 2601 Australia Ph. 61 02 6249 6940 http://arrowtheory.com

It seems one can only put constant global statements _before_ any functions are defined, not after. I would like to produce eg. "hello world!" functions in a JIT. So I was hoping to use global string constants. Is there another way to do this kind of thing ? thanks, Simon. -- Simon Burton, B.Sc. Licensed PO Box 8066 ANU Canberra 2601 Australia Ph. 61 02 6249 6940

Hi Simon, The x86 backend does generate scalar SSE2 instructions. For your example, it should emit something like: .text .align 4 .globl _sum_d _sum_d: subl $12, %esp movl 20(%esp), %eax movl 16(%esp), %ecx cmpl $0, %eax jne LBB_sum_d_2 # cond_true.preheader LBB_sum_d_1: # entry.bb9_crit_edge pxor %xmm0,

Hi, I've read over the "LLVM Language Reference Manual" a few times, and writing some ll code, but i'm stuck at a very basic point. How to decrement a counter variable ? int %count(int %n) { EntryBlock: %cond = seteq int %n, 0 br bool %cond, label %Exit, label %Next Next: ; how to decrement n ? %new_n = sub int %n, 1 br label %EntryBlock Exit: ret int 0 } I guess I

On Apr 12, 2006, at 10:23 PM, Simon Burton wrote: > > Is it possible to get llvm to generate native machine code > without using gcc and friends ? Do I use lli ? llc. llc --help lists all the options. it compiles llvm bytecode files. > > I'd like to directly create executable code that i can > stick in memory somewhere and jump into (call). > > (I'm looking

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

Simon Burton <simon at arrowtheory.com> writes: > I'm using llvm CVS, and manage to compile/link OK. Yes I include JIT.h. > The program segfaults when it gets to calling the function pointer. > >>From the Makefile: > > llvmjit: llvmjit.o > g++ llvmjit.o /home//users//simonb//lib/LLVMAsmParser.o /home//users//simonb//lib/LLVMInterpreter.o `llvm-config --ldflags`

Simon Burton <simon at arrowtheory.com> writes: >> There are several possibilities here: either add1 is assigned a NULL >> pointer, or LLVM was unable to use the JIT and generates bytecode >> instead of native code, or invalid native code was generated >> (unlikely). > > Well, it's not NULL: > > (gdb) print add1 > $1 = (int (*)(int)) 0x83e43b8 >