similar to: [LLVMdev] addPassesToEmit(Whole)File changes?

Hi folks, just installed the new llvm 1.9 build and noticed that my code no longer worked. It seems something has changed with addPassesToEmitFile(). First, the arguments to that method changed so that it no longer takes a PassManager, but only a FunctionPassManager. Instead there is a addPassesToEmitWholeFile() method, but that is marked as optional, and when I change my code to

On Sun, 21 Jan 2007, Marcel Weiher wrote: > just installed the new llvm 1.9 build and noticed that my code no > longer worked. It seems something has changed with > addPassesToEmitFile(). First, the arguments to that method changed so > that it no longer takes a PassManager, but only a > FunctionPassManager. Instead there is a addPassesToEmitWholeFile() > method, but that is

Hello, I'm trying to catch assembly output and do some formatting for its presentation while being executed. I face a problem, which is clear from the error, although I have no clue on how to do it otherwise. If generating the code for its asm output and then for jit execution I get: ********** static llvm::MachineFunction& llvm::MachineFunction::construct(const llvm::Function*, const

On Nov 7, 2007, at 6:10 PM, Antony Blakey wrote: > Hi, > I'm experimenting with using LLVM to generate dynamic FFI bridges > in VisualWorks Smalltalk. LLVM is an amazing thing! I'm going from > dynamically generated assembler source to machine code, and I have > that all working, copied from the llc tool and the JIT example. I > have two questions: > > 1. What

Hi, I'm experimenting with using LLVM to generate dynamic FFI bridges in VisualWorks Smalltalk. LLVM is an amazing thing! I'm going from dynamically generated assembler source to machine code, and I have that all working, copied from the llc tool and the JIT example. I have two questions: 1. What optimization passes, if any, should I run on the module before I pass it to the

Hi, I'm playing with some experimental register allocators for LLVM. One of them needs to build a so-called register class tree for representing the aliasing information among register classes. This tree is not function or module specific. It is actually target specific, because it depends only on the register classes defined for a machine that is used as a target of the current compilation.

Well, I've been before hours trying this, but soon after I sent the email I found something. However is quite intriguing. I just changed the order of and the static libraries that I was linking. How can this be possible?? I'm using Cmake for building my llvm projects, so I choose the order and I pick the .a libraries I want to link by hand... Thank you, alvaro 2009/3/8 Álvaro

Hi, Long time ago (llvm-svn june 2008) I asked here about a way to output the assembly code of my JIT generated code to a string, so I could use it to read it on the screen. I came up with this solution: std::string Err; const llvm::TargetMachineRegistry::entry* _arch = llvm::TargetMachineRegistry::getClosestTargetForJIT(Err); std::string FeaturesStr; llvm::TargetMachine*

When you say 'static libraries' do you mean static libraries or shared objects (.so)... Because if you mean shared objects, then it could very well explain you crash. On Mar 9, 12:16 am, Álvaro Castro Castilla <alvaro.castro.casti... at gmail.com> wrote: > Well, I've been before hours trying this, but soon after I sent the > email I found something. However is quite

Hi David, ----- Ursprüngliche Mail ---- > Von: David Greene <dag at cray.com> > An: llvmdev at cs.uiuc.edu > Gesendet: Dienstag, den 7. Oktober 2008, 18:14:45 Uhr > Betreff: Re: [LLVMdev] Getting target machine specific information at run-time > > On Tuesday 07 October 2008 06:57, Roman Levenstein wrote: > > Hi, > > > > I'm playing with some

On Mon, 9 Jan 2006, Marcel Weiher wrote: > I am currently experimenting with LLVM to provide native code > compilation services for a project of mine I call Objective-Smalltalk, > and so far quite pleased with the results. I was able to JIT-compile > some functions that send Objective-C messages, and now look forward to > compiling full methods. Cool! > I do have a couple

Hi Chris, thanks for your answers! [large executables] > It depends on what you're building. A release build of LLVM (make > ENABLE_OPTIMIZED=1, with the results in llvm/Release) is > significantly smaller than a debug build. Even with that, however, > the binaries are larger than they should be (5M?). Noone has spent > the time to track down why this is to my

Hi, I am currently experimenting with LLVM to provide native code compilation services for a project of mine I call Objective- Smalltalk, and so far quite pleased with the results. I was able to JIT-compile some functions that send Objective-C messages, and now look forward to compiling full methods. I do have a couple of questions that I haven't been able to answer after looking

On 2008-07-23, at 08:58, Simon Ask Ulsnes wrote: > I am attempting to write a garbage collector for LLVM, and the tiny > example in the docs at http://llvm.org/releases/2.3/docs/GarbageCollection.html > gives this line: > > CollectorRegistry::Add<MyCollector> > X("mygc", "My bespoke garbage collector."); > > My question is now: Am I

I've been working some more on my front-end, incorporating the advice from your previous email. I've had some success, in that I can generate a Module object, populated it with functions and instructions, and print out the resulting LLVM IR. But I'm still a little puzzled on how to connect the front end with LLVM's backend code generator, I can't seem to figure out how to

This is a template that takes care of managing plugin registries. I wrote it because I got the distinct feeling I was needlessly reinventing the wheel as I wrote a collector registry. I haven't converted anything else to use it, though. Still, it's orthogonal and has become stable in my usage, so I thought I'd submit it in advance. To get my collector registry going, all I

Thank you for that clarification. > The framework decides which Collector to use based upon the 'gc' > attribute of a function: > > define void @f() gc "mygc" { > ... > } OK, so for instance if I wanted to be able to use the GC from a C frontend (presumably by using llvm_gc_allocate?), do the C functions need this attribute as well? And if so, can this

On Sun, Jul 12, 2009 at 2:09 PM, shu<shuguang.feng at gmail.com> wrote: > Is there a beginner's tutorial/documentation on how to write passes > for the llc tool?  I've managed to write some simple analysis passes > for the opt tool but can't figure out how to do the same for llc. > What is the proper way to integrate a new MachineFunction pass with > llc?  Is there

Is there a beginner's tutorial/documentation on how to write passes for the llc tool? I've managed to write some simple analysis passes for the opt tool but can't figure out how to do the same for llc. What is the proper way to integrate a new MachineFunction pass with llc? Is there a way to register passes and selectively enable them on the command line (as with opt) or do I need to

Hi vorbis-list, Here is a small patch that adds the possibility to automatically remove the ogg-files when oggdec has decoded them. I wrote it some time ago, but forgot to send it here... ;-( I found it nifty when I was going to burn a few of the ogg files (convert to wav and remove them). http://www.efd.lth.se/~p03jr/patches/oggdec.c.diff I am not sure whether this patch works in windows.