similar to: [LLVMdev] arm eabi

Attached is a port of the new ARM eabi from gcc 4.1 to the llvm-gcc branch. With this patch I am able to bootstrap the 4.0 branch using the new eabi. The llvm-gcc branch fails with ------------------------------------ internal compiler error: in prune_unused_types_update_strings, at dwarf2out.c:14372 ------------------------------------ But I believe that this is an unrelated problem and I will

On 11/24/06, Rafael Espíndola <rafael.espindola at gmail.com> wrote: > Attached is a port of the new ARM eabi from gcc 4.1 to the llvm-gcc > branch. With this patch I am able to bootstrap the 4.0 branch using > the new eabi. The llvm-gcc branch fails with > > ------------------------------------ > internal compiler error: in prune_unused_types_update_strings, at >

There was a patch that went thru for this recently from Rafael Espindola. The fix is on the mirror. Index: gcc/dwarf2out.c =================================================================== --- gcc/dwarf2out.c (revision 120589) +++ gcc/dwarf2out.c (working copy) @@ -14361,9 +14361,8 @@ s->refcount++; /* Avoid unnecessarily putting strings that are used less than twice in the hash

I'm getting a build error when trying to build gcc4 from sources. This is for the recent 1.9 release. How I built llvm-1.9: ----------------------------- tar zxf llvm-1.9.tar.gz cd llvm-1.9/ ./configure --prefix=/custom/llvm-1.9 make ENABLE_OPTIMIZED=1 OPTIMIZE_OPTION='-O2' tools-only make install How I built gcc4: ----------------------------- export

hello, i am new to llvm and can't manage to compile the gcc backend. my steps: i compile the llvm-source first as suggested in "README.LLVM" that works fine and without any issues. then i make a new dir called build. from there i do the following: stefan at ubuntu:~/programs/llvm/build$ ../llvm-gcc4-1.9.source/configure --enable-languages=c,c++ --prefix=/usr/local/

Hi Stefan, On Thu, 2007-03-01 at 23:26 +0100, Stefan Weigert wrote: > hello, > > i am new to llvm and can't manage to compile the gcc backend. Okay. Did you read: http://llvm.org/docs/GettingStartedGuide.html ? > > my steps: > i compile the llvm-source first as suggested in "README.LLVM" > that works fine and without any issues. Okay. > > then i

On 18 April 2016 at 16:18, Silviu Baranga <Silviu.Baranga at arm.com> wrote: > This doesn't look like something ACLE specific (I can't find it in the ACLE doc). Sorry, I didn't mean it was ACLE, only that you guys were fiddling with macros. :) > This seems to be a generic macro. I think it would make sense to define it > if we know we're emitting ELF. Since the

On 18 April 2016 at 16:33, Silviu Baranga <Silviu.Baranga at arm.com> wrote: > Doing a grep "eabi" * -R | grep darwin in llvm I found the test divmod-eabi.ll > which uses the triple armv7-apple-darwin-eabi. What format does that have? Certainly not ELF. :) But I didn't mean "has eabi on triple", but "is in none-eabi mode", which may have to check a

I'm facing a problem with functions arguments. ARM EABI defines that 8-bytes arguments must be 8-bytes aligned. For example: void @f(i32 %a, i64 %b) ARM EABI: r0 <- %a r2,r3 <- %b Darwin: r0 <- %a r1,r2 <- %b void @g(i32 %a, i32 %b, i32 %c) ARM EABI or Darwin: r0 <- %a r1 <- %b r2 <- %c The problem is: I can't differ a i64 argument of two i32 arguments in

On Mon, Dec 09, 2013 at 01:58:29PM +0000, Renato Golin wrote: > I can see the error, and it's just a bad selection of choices. I was > wrong in assuming that the "eabi" at the end would always force it: > > $ clang -target arm-elf-eabi -S mod.c -o - | grep mod > .file "mod.c" > bl __modsi3 > bl __umodsi3 I was discussing this with Tim on IRC and he

On Feb 8, 2007, at 10:46 AM, Lauro Ramos Venancio wrote: > I'm facing a problem with functions arguments. ARM EABI defines that > 8-bytes arguments must be 8-bytes aligned. For example: > > void @f(i32 %a, i64 %b) > > ARM EABI: > r0 <- %a > r2,r3 <- %b Ok. I suppose this makes it easier to use 64 bit store instructions. > > Darwin: > r0 <- %a >

I am new to LLVM but have perused the code alongside using llvm-gcc and CLANG to build ARM EABI objects. Based on this superficial analysis it appears that LLVM currently does not support the ARM Exception Handling ABI (as defined under the EABI). Can anyone comment on whether plans are in place to remedy this? I did see the discussion regarding work on the MC for ARM. Will this work include

On 9 December 2013 11:51, Joerg Sonnenberger <joerg at britannica.bec.de> wrote: > Part of the concern is that the same code using / does call __aeabi_idiv > and __aeabi_uidiv. Hi Joerg, I can see the error, and it's just a bad selection of choices. I was wrong in assuming that the "eabi" at the end would always force it: $ clang -target arm-elf-eabi -S mod.c -o - |

> > Yes, you need to override both LowerArguments and LowerCallTo. All of > the current targets / abi's use the default implementation in > SelectionDAGISel.cpp But I guess ARM EABI will be the first. :-) As > far as I can see, this is the only clean way to do it. I expect the > ARM EABI specific implementation will be quite a bit simpler than the > default implementation

On 16 April 2016 at 01:44, Zhao, Weiming via cfe-dev <cfe-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: > I'm building libunwind for ARM baremetal using clang. > I notice that __ELF__ is used in libunwind and the macro is only defined for > Linux target on ARM. > Should we also predefine that for arm-none-eabi target? Do you mean in Clang's ARMTargetInfo::getTargetDefines() ? I think

On Mon, Sep 27, 2010 at 8:50 AM, Dennis Taul <dtaul at codeaurora.org> wrote: > > I am new to LLVM but have perused the code alongside using llvm-gcc > and CLANG to build ARM EABI objects. > > Based on this superficial analysis it appears that LLVM currently does > not support the ARM Exception Handling ABI (as defined under the > EABI). > > Can anyone comment on

On Mon, Dec 09, 2013 at 07:56:26AM +0000, Tim Northover wrote: > Hi Joerg, > > > At the moment, this will call __modsi3 and __umodsi3, even though those > > functions are not part of AAPCS. Should this be considered a lowering > > bug in the ARM target? > > LLVM actually supports both variants, depending on the target. The > __aeabi_* functions are part of the

The buildbot @ http://lab.llvm.org:8011/builders/llvm-gcc-i686-pc-linux-gnu-cross-arm-eabi-soft-float/builds/850 is failing with following assertion failure. Is it possible for someone to collect a preprocessed source file and file a PR ? Thanks, - Devang cc1: /opt/buildslave/osuosl/slave/llvm-gcc-i686-pc-linux-gnu-cross-arm-eabi-soft-float/llvm.src/lib/CodeGen/LiveIntervalAnalysis.cpp:713: bool

I am ok with adding an attribute but don't like to add two of them as you've described. I don't think you need the "sequential piece ID" to deal with this issue, no? You just need a little extra bookkeeping in the target lowering code. Alternatively, you can use a "original alignment" attribute (i.e. alignment of unexpanded argument). That would be a 5-bit

Hi Joerg, > At the moment, this will call __modsi3 and __umodsi3, even though those > functions are not part of AAPCS. Should this be considered a lowering > bug in the ARM target? LLVM actually supports both variants, depending on the target. The __aeabi_* functions are part of the ARM "runtime ABI" and largely independent of AAPCS. For whatever reason, Linux (& Darwin)