similar to: [LLVMdev] Runtime optimisation in the JIT

Hi, I am working with llvm 1.3 on a sparcv9 machine. I have successfully built llvm and llvm-gcc frontend. I can run many tools including llvmgcc, llvm-dis, and llc. After using /opt/SUNWspro/bin/cc to assemble .s file into a program binary, I can run the binary correctly as well. I am interested in the JIT compiler (lli). When I directly run the LLVM bytecode using interpretation ("lli

> > ExecutionEngine* EE = ExecutionEngine::create( MP, true ); > > As Reid pointed out, changing true to false will get it to work. as I've posted already, I got Segmentation Fault. Now, i have re-compiled LLVM with debug support. The evaluation is broken at line 78 in file: lib/ExecutionEngine/JIT/JIT.cpp The assertion assert(ArgValues.size() == 1); fails. But

On Sat, 14 Aug 2004, Valery A.Khamenya wrote: > > > ExecutionEngine* EE = ExecutionEngine::create( MP, true ); > > As Reid pointed out, changing true to false will get it to work. > > as I've posted already, I got Segmentation Fault. > Now, i have re-compiled LLVM with debug support. > > The evaluation is broken at line 78 in file: >

I think I might have found a bug in the exection engine's 'constants folding'. Basically APInt's parameters are the wrong way round. Line 577 for lib/ExecutionEngine/ExecutionEngine.cpp :- case Instruction::PtrToInt: { GenericValue GV = getConstantValue(Op0); uint32_t PtrWidth = TD->getPointerSizeInBits(); GV.IntVal = APInt(PtrWidth,

Hi all, I'm trying to print to screen the value read by the fread function. I'm at the point where source refers to the GetElementPtrInst ( pointer to the buffer where fread stored the data - %5 in my case ) and the fread() has been already called. I thought the correct approach to achieve what I need was: ExecutionContext& SF = ECStack.back(); GenericValue SRC =

Hi, In my application I am JITing thousands of functions, though I am doing it sequantially and running only one at a time. So it is crucial to be able to properly clean up the memory from an old JITed function when JITing and running the new one. I am using Haskell binding of LLVM and my application works OK. However, memory usage increases and never decreases during the run time of my

Hi, Was this ever resolved? I'm curious, I'm also in a situation where there may be many (very many) JITted functions over the history of an application (which may be running for many days) Thanks On Mar 20, 2009, at 7:34 AM, George Giorgidze wrote: > Hi, > > In my application I am JITing thousands of functions, though I am > doing it sequantially and running only

ick! Is there a bugzilla on this? Reid. On Sat, 2004-08-14 at 13:49, Chris Lattner wrote: > If you look at the 3 lines above the assert that is failing, you'll see > this: > > // FIXME: This code should handle a couple of common cases efficiently, but > // it should also implement the general case by code-gening a new anonymous > // nullary function to call.

Hi all, I have the condition of an ICmpInst in a variable called condition obtained doing GenericValue condition = getOperandValue(&I, SF); Now I would like to understand if the comparison was true or false. Is it correct to use condition.IntVal.getSExtValue() and if the value is 0 consider the true and if the value is -1 consider the condition false? I'm not sure because I was expecting

Hi Lang, Thanks for the reply. Responses below. As far as I know nobody is actively working on MCJIT any more. I've been > working on the next generation of LLVM JIT APIs (ORC - see > include/llvm/ExecutionEngine/Orc) for a while now, but they don't have > functionality for running arbitrary functions yet. > Thanks for the pointer to ORC -- it looks like the runFunction

Hi, Chris Lattner wrote: > In the 2.3 release, we included a list of the major LLVM API changes. If you > are working on upgrading your code from 2.3 to 2.4, I'd appreciate it if you > could compile a list of the major stumbling blocks you have, so that others > can benefit from your experience. Please send any info to the list, thanks! No major stumbling blocks during our

I'm trying to turn some GenericValues into Constants in the interpreter using code like this, in a switch statement: case Type::IntTyID: SI = ConstantSInt::get(FB->getType(), ArgVals[i].IntVal); params.push_back(UI); UI->dump(); //for testing break; FB is a Function::ArgumentListType::iterator ArgVals is a std::vector<GenericValue> the switch

Aaron Gray wrote: > I think I might have found a bug in the exection engine's 'constants > folding'. > > Basically APInt's parameters are the wrong way round. > > Line 577 for lib/ExecutionEngine/ExecutionEngine.cpp :- > > case Instruction::PtrToInt: { > GenericValue GV = getConstantValue(Op0); > uint32_t PtrWidth =

In my main function after generate the code and before start the execution via JIT I do this: ExecutionEngine *EE = EngineBuilder(M).create(); string str = EE->getTargetData()->getStringRepresentation(); str[0] = 'e'; M->setDataLayout(str); if (verifyModule(*M)) { errs() << argv[0] << ": Error building the

I'm having some trouble getting access to a global variable with getPointerToGlobal. The resulting value is not what I am expecting. My assembly looks something like this: @gresult = global i32 undef define i32 @eval_expr() { entry: ... store i32 %3, i32* @gresult ret i32 %3 } Where "gresult" is created with: auto global = new llvm::GlobalVariable( *module, int32Type,

Dear All I'm trying to create storeInst using StoreInst *SI = new StoreInst(val, AI, BB); AI is an alloca instruction previously created, BB is the basicBlock I want to put instructionsi in. Val is the value to store. I've created val from a genericValue like this: Value* val = ConstantInt::get(getGlobalContext(), Result.IntVal); Result is the genericValue However I keep getting

Valery, That's pretty cute actually. Do you want this "brilliant" :) example in the cvs repository? I'd be happy to put it in. Reid. Valery A.Khamenya wrote: > Hi LLVMers, > > the example attached I have used to prove that JIT and some visible > optimizations are really invoked. > > Proved OK. I got 30% speed-up in comparison to gcc 3.3.3 >

On Tue, 17 Aug 2004, Reid Spencer wrote: > That's pretty cute actually. Do you want this "brilliant" :) example in the cvs > repository? I'd be happy to put it in. Here's an idea: how about we take the ModuleMaker, Valery's previous example, and this one and put them all in one "small examples" project? -Chris > Valery A.Khamenya wrote: > >

On Sat, 14 Aug 2004, Valery A.Khamenya wrote: > hm, here is the part of my code starting LLVM function: > > /////////////////////////// > ExistingModuleProvider* MP = new ExistingModuleProvider(M); > ExecutionEngine* EE = ExecutionEngine::create( MP, true ); As Reid pointed out, changing true to false will get it to work. > // Call the `foo' function with no

On May 24, 2008, at 4:25 PM, Marcel Moolenaar wrote: > On May 24, 2008, at 12:12 PM, Bill Wendling wrote: >> Let us know if you would like extra eyes on the two PPC failures. >> Many >> of us have a lot of experience with C++. :-) Do you know where these >> allocations are? > > I don't mind if people help out, so here's some information: Nice!