similar to: [LLVMdev] 2.0 frontend hangs

Hi, While trying to compile ioquake3 (http://ioquake3.org/? page=get&method=source; use provided make-macosx-ub.sh wrapper to compile) with LLVM 2.0 for an experiment (seriously :-)), the 2.0 frontend hangs on a program file called code/server/sv_client.c. Apparently, it's stuck on line 2964 of gcc/gcc.c while waiting for some subprocess to complete. The 1.9 frontend however does

Hello, Bram. > How should I debug the frontend (currently recompiling with debugging > support), as there are various threads/processes involved? Should I > file a bug report? I filled bug report. This is bug in one of LLVM's optimization passes. You can monitor it at llvm.org/PR1446. You can workaround it now by passing -O0 to "bad" file. Thanks! -- With best

Hi Bram, Could you submit bug reports for all of these problems? Thanks! -bw On 5/29/07, Bram Adams <bram.adams at ugent.be> wrote: > Hi, > > Today I managed to link ioquake3, but generating a binary does not > work yet. > > > 1) On OSX, I get: > > Error: Code generator does not support intrinsic function > 'llvm.ppc.altivec.lvsl'! > > when I

Hi, Today I managed to link ioquake3, but generating a binary does not work yet. 1) On OSX, I get: Error: Code generator does not support intrinsic function 'llvm.ppc.altivec.lvsl'! when I do: llc file.bc -march=c -o file.c 2) On Linux X86, llc does not give any problem, but I get this while compiling the generated .c file: error: unknown register name 'S' in

Hello, Bram > * It seems that a C-call like printf("---\n") is transformed to puts > ("---") in the LLVM IR instead of keeping it a printf. What are the > circumstances in which this happens? Do other similar conversions > occur? Can this be turned off (lower optimisation level?)? Manually > replacing the puts-calls by a printf-call is not

Hi Anton, You're already a part of the llvm development team by participating actively on the llvm development list :) If you wish we can put you on: http://llvm.cs.uiuc.edu/Developers.html Great to have you on the team, welcome! We (Jeff, Morten, Paolo, the rest of the team and I) are looking forward to cooperate with you and to push win32 and mingw versions even further to stable and

On Tue, 29 May 2007, Bram Adams wrote: > Today I managed to link ioquake3, but generating a binary does not > work yet. > 1) On OSX, I get: > > Error: Code generator does not support intrinsic function > 'llvm.ppc.altivec.lvsl'! > > when I do: llc file.bc -march=c -o file.c The C backend doesn't support all target-specific intrinsics. > 2) On Linux X86,

How can a frontend tell LLVM to put a function argument on stack/register/etc? On Thu, Oct 4, 2012 at 5:08 PM, Anton Korobeynikov <asl at math.spbu.ru> wrote: >> Ah, got it. >> Sounds like we might need to introduce CC_X86_Win32_MSVC_ThisCall then?.. > No, we should not. It should be properly expanded in frontend. > > -- > With best regards, Anton Korobeynikov >

I tried to ask for 32 and that didn't seem to help. MallocInst also seemed to ignore the 16 byte directive. For now, I'm just issuing all my loads as unaligned and that's working ok. Thanks, Chuck. -----Original Message----- From: llvmdev-bounces at cs.uiuc.edu [mailto:llvmdev-bounces at cs.uiuc.edu] On Behalf Of Evan Cheng Sent: Monday, October 01, 2007 10:35 AM To: asl at

Hello, Bram. > My question: does this change break certain design decisions, > optimisations, ...? This is bug in the source code. You have two symbols with the same name in the different object files, which is definite redefinition. At least one of them should be declared with "extern". -- With best regards, Anton Korobeynikov. Faculty of Mathematics & Mechanics, Saint

Chuck, > It is dying trying to store a our working vector into one of the LLVM > vectors created on the stack. Despite the align-16 directive on the > alloca instruction, it is not always aligning to a 16-byte boundary. The stack is not necessary 16 bytes aligned on linux/windows. The vector is really sotred aligned relative to %esp, but %esp value is not good. This is known problem

Hello, Bill. > Has anyone gotten the latest/greatest sources from the LLVM-GCC open > source server lately? No. It's still at rev 319 (as of 29.04). -- With best regards, Anton Korobeynikov. Faculty of Mathematics & Mechanics, Saint Petersburg State University.

Bill, > When I try to compile on Darwin now, I get this: Could you please provide LLVM bytecode, where bug is reproducible with llc? -- With best regards, Anton Korobeynikov. Faculty of Mathematics & Mechanics, Saint Petersburg State University.

Hello, Rafael > With this patch I was able to bootstrap gcc in linux x86-64 with > shared libraries enabled :-) Awesome! But... -ENOPATCH :( -- With best regards, Anton Korobeynikov. Faculty of Mathematics & Mechanics, Saint Petersburg State University.

Finally, I got my hands on Windows machine again today. I extracted llvm-2.1-x86-mingw32.tar.bz2 and llvm-gcc4.0-2.1-x86-mingw32.tar.bz2 to C:\llvm (It's a bare Windows Vista installation without MinGW) Added C:\llvm\bin;C:\llvm\libexec\gcc\i686-pc-mingw32\4.0.1 to PATH (C:\llvm\libexec\gcc\i686-pc-mingw32\4.0.1 was added for cc1.exe) Downloaded

> Ah, got it. > Sounds like we might need to introduce CC_X86_Win32_MSVC_ThisCall then?.. No, we should not. It should be properly expanded in frontend. -- With best regards, Anton Korobeynikov Faculty of Mathematics and Mechanics, Saint Petersburg State University

2013/3/28 Anton Korobeynikov <asl at math.spbu.ru>: >> How can having an MSVC compatible compiler be to the detriment of clang and >> llvm? No one is trying to break mingw here, merely add support for something > Just to make stuff clear: I just wanted proper naming which will be > non-confusing. Right now we have: > - isTargetWindows() which really means

Nothing... I'll show you all the info related to: The intrinsic: def int_soru_sre : Intrinsic<[llvm_void_ty, llvm_i32_ty], [IntrWriteMem]>; The lower instruction (in MIPS): class SORUI<bits<6> op, dag outs, dag ins, string asmstr, list<dag> pattern, InstrItinClass itin>: FI<op, outs, ins, asmstr, pattern, itin> { let isBarrier = 1; // or call,

Hello, Bill > It may be my lack of understanding, but it appears that having -- > enable-eh set during compilation of llvm-gcc is causing extra files > to be compiled. Oh, no. They are always compiled. > They do. However, it doesn't seem to stop it from failing during > compilation of unwind-dw2.c for libgcc -- it has > "__builtin_eh_return" in it. During

Hello, Daniel. > glibc < 2.4 don't reliably keep stack at 16 bytes through some calls > (qsort, etc), but otherwise, it stays 16 byte aligned. Interesting, but why in this case stuff like 'force_align_arg_pointer' required? -- With best regards, Anton Korobeynikov. Faculty of Mathematics & Mechanics, Saint Petersburg State University.