similar to: [LLVMdev] llvm-gcc-4-2 development branch is open

Hi Devang, thanks very much for doing this. > 2) I'd appreciate if LLVM specific code is covered by appropriate > markers. There are tons of existing examples in current sources. > Entire LLVM support patch is covered by these markers. I might have > removed code from llvm-gcc-4.0 that was required for LLVM support but > was not covered under /* APPLE LOCAL

On Jul 13, 2007, at 9:28 AM, Duncan Sands wrote: > Hi Chris, > >> This is probably a patch that got checked into llvm-gcc4 after devang >> started work on 4.2. Please feel free to update 4.2 to the version >> in >> 4.0. > > no, it doesn't exist in 4.0. hmm. that can not be true. It was applied by Evan on May 07, 2007 to unbreak Apple style builds. -

Hi Devang, > llvm-gcc-4-2 development branch is now open for development at > > llvm.org/svn/llvm-project/llvm-gcc-4-2 I noticed the following difference between llvm-gcc and llvm-gcc-4-2 in gcc/llvm-linker-hack.cpp, any idea where it came from? Thanks, Duncan. @@ -28,6 +28,7 @@ #include "llvm/Bitcode/ReaderWriter.h" #include "llvm/CodeGen/ScheduleDAG.h"

> 2) I'd appreciate if LLVM specific code is covered by appropriate > markers. There are tons of existing examples in current sources. > Entire LLVM support patch is covered by these markers. I might have > removed code from llvm-gcc-4.0 that was required for LLVM support but > was not covered under /* APPLE LOCAL <begin|end> LLVM */ markers. If > someone

On Fri, 13 Jul 2007, Duncan Sands wrote: > I noticed the following difference between llvm-gcc and llvm-gcc-4-2 > in gcc/llvm-linker-hack.cpp, any idea where it came from? This is probably a patch that got checked into llvm-gcc4 after devang started work on 4.2. Please feel free to update 4.2 to the version in 4.0. Thanks! -Chris > @@ -28,6 +28,7 @@ > #include

Hi Devang, > >> This is probably a patch that got checked into llvm-gcc4 after devang > >> started work on 4.2. Please feel free to update 4.2 to the version > >> in > >> 4.0. > > > > no, it doesn't exist in 4.0. > > hmm. that can not be true. It was applied by Evan on May 07, 2007 to > unbreak Apple style builds. this difference

On Nov 29, 2006, at 11:27 AM, Devang Patel wrote: > When we back port patches from FSF GCC mainline, we decorate them > with 'mainline' markers, for example > > /* APPLE LOCAL begin 4229621 mainline */ > .... > /* APPLE LOCAL end 4229621 mainline */ > > There are many examples of such markers in source. These markers > help us resolve conflicts when >

When we back port patches from FSF GCC mainline, we decorate them with 'mainline' markers, for example /* APPLE LOCAL begin 4229621 mainline */ .... /* APPLE LOCAL end 4229621 mainline */ There are many examples of such markers in source. These markers help us resolve conflicts when we merge current sources in mass with FSF GCC mainline. They also help solve mysterious failures

On Wednesday 11 July 2007 17:03, Devang Patel wrote: > Hi All, > > llvm-gcc-4-2 development branch is now open for development at > > llvm.org/svn/llvm-project/llvm-gcc-4-2 > > It is not yet ready, it can not even bootstrap. I welcome LLVM > developers to test and apply fixes! How does this relate to the current llvm-gcc? Is that version still going to be added to the

The attached patch is a backport of patch 98010 from the gcc svn. It is useful mostly to make the porting of more ARM patches easier, but will be needed when we start to use C++ on ARM. Could someone please commit it to the svn? Thanks, Rafael -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: llvm-gcc-98010.patch Type: text/x-patch Size: 13491 bytes Desc: not

I'd like to get a quick feedback on the lifetime.end metadata kind I'm considering using. I'm planning to use it in cases where lifetime.end intrinsics do not give lifetime bounds that are tight enough. As an example of when lifetime.end cannot provide a tight lifetime bound, consider the following program: void test111(int n) { if (n < 10) { string str = "One";

Hi All, I am trying to write code for simple instrumentation. What I want to do is to insert a call to an external function for result of each conditional branch instruction. This external function simply print true or false based on the result of condition. The modified code is then written into new file. However when I try to link that file with another bitcode file (containing external

Hello, I having a weird problem while writing a bytecode module to a string, and after read/parse it for unsing on a jit. I write a pass to export function to module, and put this module inside a global variable. I use WriteBitcodeToFile for this. For debuging, after this write, I try to load the exported module with parseBitcodeFile. This two step works. After, while the compiled program is

On Jul 11, 2007, at 4:55 PM, David Greene wrote: > On Wednesday 11 July 2007 17:03, Devang Patel wrote: >> Hi All, >> >> llvm-gcc-4-2 development branch is now open for development at >> >> llvm.org/svn/llvm-project/llvm-gcc-4-2 >> >> It is not yet ready, it can not even bootstrap. I welcome LLVM >> developers to test and apply fixes! > >

Hi Gordon, I wrote a small example, but while running I get an error("Tied to execute an unknown external function"), where I am wrong? Thanks in advance. Kirill. int some_test_func( int ){ std::cout << "!!!!" << std::endl; return 8848; } int _tmain(int argc, _TCHAR* argv[]){ Module *M = new Module("test"); ExistingModuleProvider* MP = new

Hi Kirill, Don't forget to add X86TargetMachine.obj (add to Additional Dependencies in Linker options, if you are using MSVS) otherwise LLVM will try and use Interpreter instead of JIT. Hope this helps, Rob. > -----Original Message----- > From: llvmdev-bounces at cs.uiuc.edu [mailto:llvmdev-bounces at cs.uiuc.edu] > On Behalf Of kirill havok > Sent: Wednesday, August 20, 2008

kirill havok wrote: > Hi Gordon, > I wrote a small example, but while running I get an error("Tied to > execute an unknown external function"), where I am wrong? > I think the problem is that some_test_func() is a C++ function, so its name is being mangled during compilation. To fix it, I think you want to add a declaration telling the compiler to treat some_test_func()

I mad the change, and still have the problem. I investigate more the source code of llvm. First, I change isRawBitcode function to print the content of the parameter like this: original: http://llvm.org/docs/doxygen/html/ReaderWriter_8h_source.html#l00081 inline bool isRawBitcode(const unsigned char *BufPtr, const unsigned char *BufEnd) { // These bytes sort

Hi, I'm trying to write a small piece of code that inlines all calls to a particular function. The codes is as follows Function* klee_check_divF = module->getFunction("klee_div_zero_check"); assert(klee_check_divF != 0 && "Failed to find klee_div_zero_check function"); // Hack inline checks for (Module::iterator f = module->begin(), fe =

Hi All, Is there any documentation on how to use DIFactory to generate basic debug info? It seems similar enough to IRBuilder but working with objects (rather than pointers) and that's raising some issues. Also, am I supposed to run the ModuleDebugInfoPrinterPass manually, or it gets printed automatically when I WriteBitcodeToFile? -- cheers, --renato http://systemcall.org/ Reclaim