similar to: [LLVMdev] RFC: Patch for Exceptions

On Aug 28, 2007, at 11:20 PM, Duncan Sands wrote: > Hi Bill, > >> This is a (very) rough patch to fix building LLVM with exceptions on >> PPC Darwin. Basically, it puts the burden of adding the "--enable-eh" >> on the specific target, which is where I think it should go. > > I don't like it. LLVM has plenty of features that are not supported > on

On Aug 28, 2007, at 11:35 PM, Chris Lattner wrote: > On Aug 28, 2007, at 11:20 PM, Duncan Sands wrote: > >>> This is a (very) rough patch to fix building LLVM with exceptions on >>> PPC Darwin. Basically, it puts the burden of adding the "--enable- >>> eh" >>> on the specific target, which is where I think it should go. >> >> I

> Args needs to be an array of the arguments and NumArgs needs to be the > size of the array. If you have a std::vector then you can just: > > new CallInst(F, &ArgVec[0], ArgVec.size(), ...) Doesn't the code above make an assumption about how std::vector is implemented? If ArgVec is defined as std::vector<Value*> ArgVec; then &ArgVec[0] returns a Value**. Let

Right now llvm-gcc generates exception handling intrinsics, but actual eh codegen (--enable-eh) is turned off. On x86-linux, turning it on generates no new failures in the testsuite, so how about turning it on? The problem is likely to be PPC which claims to support eh but doesn't support it completely yet AFAIK. I suggest setting SupportsExceptionHandling to false for PPC until it is

On Tue, 2007-03-06 at 22:44 -0600, Ryan M. Lefever wrote: > To create a new CallInst I used to call the following constructor: > > CallInst(Value *F, const std::vector<Value*> &Par, const std::string > &Name = "", Instruction *InsertBefore = 0); > > However, it seems as though that constructor has been removed. I assume > that I'm suppossed to

Hi Bill, > This is a (very) rough patch to fix building LLVM with exceptions on > PPC Darwin. Basically, it puts the burden of adding the "--enable-eh" > on the specific target, which is where I think it should go. I don't like it. LLVM has plenty of features that are not supported on all targets, why should it be the responsability of llvm-gcc to manage this particular

Hi, i am trying to compile llvm in a 64 Bit PowerPC machine with Yellowdog Linux 6.1 operating system. I could compile llvm but when I was trying to compile the llvm-gcc4.2 front end the compilation aborted with following error message: ../../gcc/config/rs6000/rs6000.c: In function ‘rs6000_override_options’: ../../gcc/config/rs6000/rs6000.c:1510: error: ‘MASK_MACHO_DYNAMIC_NO_PIC’ undeclared

Thanks for the help Reid! I frequently look at the online doxygen, but sometimes its difficult to determine the correct replacement when a method is removed from LLVM. In this particular case, I knew which new CallInst constructor to use, I just couldn't figure out the proper syntax. At any rate, I really appreciate your help!! Reid Spencer wrote: > On Tue, 2007-03-06 at 22:44 -0600,

: I have an XP client running office XP. This is sitting on an network along with an IBM RS6000. The RS6000 has SAMBA installed and configured so that the XP client can see the RS6000 as though it is a network device. The user opens a template in Word 2002 which creates a mailmerge document using VBA. The VBA code gets the name of the document and the location for both the document and the data

Hi Chris, > The static code generator works for many simple cases, but it is currently > disabled. To enable it, uncomment this line in > llvm-gcc/gcc/llvm-convert.cpp: > > //#define ITANIUM_STYLE_EXCEPTIONS > > > Based on that, you should be able to compile simple C++ codes that throw > and catch exceptions. The next step would be to make a .bc file, run it

Hi Hal, > I am interested in getting dragonegg to work on PowerPC. Obviously the > stuff in src/x86 needs to be replaced/replicated for PowerPC, but if you > have a few minutes, can you provide your thoughts on what has to be > changed between x86 and PPC. you should probably start by doing this: copy gcc/config/rs6000/llvm-rs6000.cpp to (in the dragonegg source) src/ppc/Target.cpp.

Hi, I compiled rsync on an HPUX 11i box, and got lots of errors about redefining sendfile() and sendpath(). The compilation succeeded, but the binary failed. I then took a binary I had compiled on an HP11.00 box, and it worked fine. I tried this with both gcc & the HP ansic compilers. The same results. I am attaching a full transcript of the configure & compilation session. The ld

Hi, I'm guessing that no one has tried this exact combination yet. I'm trying to build the gcc4.2 front end with current LLVM SVN on a G4 Powerbook running 10.4.10. I started with this: ../gcc4.2-trunk/configure --prefix=$HOME/Documents/hpcl/LLVM/llvm-gcc-4-2/install --enable-llvm=$HOME/Documents/hpcl/LLVM/llvm-svn-obj/ --with-gmp=$HOME/Documents/hpcl/LLVM/llvm-gcc-4-2/libdeps

A few days ago I send a message titled "A samba question or a mutt question". I got a few repies but they suggested wide work-arounds to the problem. I have done some more work and it is clear it is not anything to do with the mail side of what I was trying. The question or problem I have is essentially this:- How do you double click on a MS Word icon to bring the document into MS Word

I have just installed Samba for the following configuration: AIX 4.2, with NT clients We are trying to print from clients to unix printers through a Progress (database) program. On unix, I would identify my destination as "lp -s -dprinter1". Now, I indicate "//rs6000/printer1". People in our systems department (and therefore, people with "root" privileges) can

Hi, Kurt Hornik and myself have an almost successful build of R on AIX including dynamic loading of libraries ... which fails make check :-( Anyway, as we have no AIX experience at all, maybe somebody else knows what's going on. Here's the problem: > 1/0 [1]INF > is.finite(1/0) [1] TRUE R was built using the flags included below, gcc version is 2.7.2. Does anybody with

On Fri, 2012-04-27 at 14:54 -0500, Hal Finkel wrote: > There is a comment in the file which reads: > > /* The weird 'i#*X' constraints on the following suppress a gcc > warning when __excepts is not a constant. Otherwise, they mean the > same as just plain 'i'. */ [sinp] > ("mtfsb0 %s0" : : "i#*X"(__builtin_ffs (__excepts))); [snip]

Cyrille Mescam wrote: > On Mon, Jun 13, 2005 at 11:02:10AM -0500, John Criswell wrote: > >>Cyrille Mescam wrote: >> [snip] > > In fact, i am using the CFE build procedures. I am on instructions 5. > > cyrille > Okay, I took a closer look at your output. I was correct in that gccas is attempting to assemble a native PPC assembly language file. However,

No, I do not see any such warning. This explanation appears unlikely as it had no problem building every other cpp file. There is a third alternative: have someone fix whatever broke in the last week or two. And, no, I cannot use llvm-i386.cpp or llvm-rs6000.cpp as I am running x86_64. Nor am I going to debug the gcc build system. Devang Patel wrote: > > On Jan 4, 2007, at 8:06 PM,

Peter, Could you please comment on: http://llvm.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=12757 Specifically, gcc seems to allow this: int __flt_rounds() { unsigned long fpscr; __asm__ volatile("mffs %0" : "=f"(fpscr)); return fpscr; } My reading of this is that gcc allocates a floating-point register to hold the result of the mffs instruction, and then bit casts (and truncates?) the