similar to: [LLVMdev] 2.0 Release Process

Le Tue, May 08, 2007 at 10:17:41PM -0700, Tanya M. Lattner écrivait/wrote: > > Here is the schedule: > > May 7th - Release branch created. Developers should begin reviewing > all documentation. > > May 14th - Tar balls and binaries are released for general testing. I'll > also need volunteers to create additional llvm-gcc binaries that I have > not provided.

Thank you for this reply. If so, is there any way to merge basic blocks into a single one? Thanks, Seung J. Lee ---- Original message ---- >Date: Fri, 29 Jun 2007 22:27:38 +0200 >From: Basile STARYNKEVITCH <basile at starynkevitch.net> >Subject: Re: [LLVMdev] LLVM assembly without basic block >To: LLVM Developers Mailing List <llvmdev at cs.uiuc.edu> > >Seung

Hello All, What version of g++ is usable to compile the latest LLVM CVS snapshot on a Linux/x86-64 (AMD64) Debian/ Sid or Etch plateform? What compiler do LLVM dzevelopers use to compile LLVM on Linux/X86-64 systems? IKt seems that most versions of g++ fail to compile LLVM and that some others compile it wrongly (producing buggy code)? Why can't g++-4.1 be used? FWIW, the latest gcc

On Sat, 12 May 2007, Basile STARYNKEVITCH wrote: > with the latest LLVM (almost 2.0 CVS) what is the right way to read a module > from a byte array fetched from a database? The bitcode reader will read from any MemoryBuffer object. There are a variety of static methods on MemoryBuffer to create them from files, stdio, and memory. If your buffer is in memory, just create a memorybuffer

Hello, guys. I just wonder if there is any way to spit out LLVM assembly without any basic block division. E.g., If I emit LLVM assembly for the following simple code: ------------------------------------------------------------ void f_loop(long* c, long sz) { long i; for (i = 0; i < sz; i++) { long offset = i * sz; long* out = c + offset; out[i] = 0; } }

Le Thu, May 03, 2007 at 09:36:22AM -0700, Chris Lattner écrivait/wrote: > On Thu, 3 May 2007, Basile STARYNKEVITCH wrote: > > > > > FWIW, the latest gcc snapshot from yesterday gcc version 4.3.0 20070501 > > (experimental) fail to compile latest LLVM (with compile errors!). > > Please file an llvm bug report with these errors. It may be that we are > doing

Hello, with the latest LLVM (almost 2.0 CVS) what is the right way to read a module from a byte array fetched from a database? I thought that I could subclass llbm::module to add my own fields (typically, a MySQL id number) and then parse it as bitcode, but I am stuck, since apparently the only way to parse bitcode is to use a BitcodeReader then calling materializeModule gives a fresh llvm

On Thu, 3 May 2007, Basile STARYNKEVITCH wrote: > > What version of g++ is usable to compile the latest LLVM CVS snapshot on a > Linux/x86-64 (AMD64) Debian/ Sid or Etch plateform? Please look here: http://llvm.org/docs/GettingStarted.html#brokengcc I'd suggest late versions of GCC 4.0.x. The 4.1 series has had numerous problems compiling LLVM on x86-64, though some people have

Thank you for reminding me the notion of the basic block. Of course, I know all the assembly takes the form of BBs and is divided into units of BB. OK. It looks better for me to explain what I wanted to do more clear from the first. Actually, I am working on emitting out an assembly of VM by using LLVM. LLVM assembly looks similar with this VM assembly except BB. The VM assembly does not have the

Hello All Does any know about some opensource multithread-compatible (or concurrent) garbage collector library, if possible suitable for LLVM? (I mean that I want several mutator threads; the collector can be stoptheworld or concurrent ....) H.Boehm's conservative GC is multithread compatible, but seems quite slow (allocation is about the time of a C malloc). And it is well known that

Hello All, On a Debian/AMD64 host I am surprised that there is apparently no way to generate position independent code in shared object (i.e. to output files which are easy dlopen-able without pain)? I probably missed something obvious, but what? I want to compile LLVM assembly source code -suitably generated- into .so as directly as possible... Regards -- Basile STARYNKEVITCH

Hello (my machine is a Debian/Sid/x86-64/Core2) Assuming I have one C source file chello.c, to compile it into a dynamically loadable thru dlopen shared object, I can run gcc -fPIC -shared -O chello.c -o chello.so I thought that, assuming I have one llvm source ehello.ll, the equivalent would be llvmc2 -opt ehello.ll -o ehello.so but it is not that simple. Any clues ? May I also

On Mon, 22 Oct 2007, Basile STARYNKEVITCH wrote: > On a Debian/AMD64 host I am surprised that there is apparently no way to > generate position independent code in shared object (i.e. to output > files which are easy dlopen-able without pain)? > > I probably missed something obvious, but what? You're missing the fact that llvmc is highly experimental, and is not really usable

Basile STARYNKEVITCH wrote: > Does any know about some opensource multithread-compatible (or > concurrent) garbage collector library, if possible suitable for LLVM? > > (I mean that I want several mutator threads; the collector can be > stoptheworld or concurrent ....) > > H.Boehm's conservative GC is multithread compatible, but seems quite > slow (allocation is

Hi Guys, I am really a fresh man on compiler. I want to make a compiler that transform C-like language into assemble form, as the the same as Pixie's or Aqsis's RenderMan Shading Language compiler, just like this, #!version 2.1.1 surface #!parameters: uniform float Ka = 1 uniform float Kd = 1 #!variables: varying vector Nf varying vector temporary_0 varying vector temporary_1 varying

On Tue, Jun 10, 2008 at 11:07 PM, Mahadevan R <mdevan.foobar at gmail.com> wrote: > int sum(int n) > { > return n + sum(n-1); > } > > it generates this: > > define i32 @sum(i32 %n) nounwind { > entry: > %tmp2 = add i32 %n, -1 ; <i32> [#uses=1] > %tmp3 = tail call i32 @sum( i32 %tmp2 ) nounwind ; <i32>

Thanks for the help with stack smashing. Now my Ubuntu-user has another problem that I cannot reproduce from Debian: my HLVM JIT compiler links to C code and calls it both from the compiler and from the run-time generated code. That works perfectly here but on his Ubuntu box it compiles fine and the compiler calls the C code fine but the LLVM-generated code barfs with: *ERROR: Program used

On Mon, 5 Nov 2007, Vikram S. Adve wrote: > -- It would be helpful to add some navigation links at the top and bottom of > the pages. I added a TOC to each chapter, thanks. > -- Not clear why PrototypeAST::Codegen returns a Function* instead of a > Value* like the other CodeGen methods? I clarified this in the text. The short version is that PrototypeAST doesn't correspond

Hi, While playing around on the LLVM, I tried this code: int sum(int n) { if (n == 0) return 0; else return n + sum(n-1); } and this is what "llvm-gcc -O2" gave me: define i32 @sum(i32 %n) nounwind { entry: %tmp215 = icmp eq i32 %n, 0 ; <i1> [#uses=1] br i1 %tmp215, label %bb10, label %tailrecurse.bb10_crit_edge tailrecurse.bb10_crit_edge: ; preds =

Dear All, I downloaded the latest CVS of llvm I want to try to use LLVM only for JIT only use (generating code in memory for x86 and, when available PowerPC [32bits]) How do I ./configure to avoid being asked about llvmgcc, which, in my very partial understanding, is only used to parse C code... If I understand correctly what Chris Lattner emailed me, LLVM uses only GCC frontend for C & C++