similar to: [LLVMdev] Vector troubles

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.

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

What is gcc's caller stack alignment assumption on Linux? Unless it's 16 byte or more, the callee will have to dynamically align the stack. Evan On Sep 28, 2007, at 5:49 PM, Daniel Berlin <dberlin at dberlin.org> wrote: > On 9/28/07, Anton Korobeynikov <asl at math.spbu.ru> wrote: >> Chuck, >> >>> It is dying trying to store a our working vector

You can always ask for > 16 byte stack alignment. :-) Evan On Sep 30, 2007, at 10:47 AM, Anton Korobeynikov wrote: > 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? >

On 9/28/07, Anton Korobeynikov <asl at math.spbu.ru> wrote: > 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. On recent

Hello, Ashwin. You wrote Wednesday, May 24, 2006, 11:25:11 AM: AC> "Pass::getClassPassInfo<PassClass>() "Pass class not AC> registered!"" failed: file AC> "/cygdrive/c/llvm/llvm/include/llvm/PassAnalysisSupport.h", line 76 AC> Aborted Same for me. AC> Wihtout the -march specified (using native x86 assembly) it does AC> convert it into

Hello, > If anybody has an idea of how to fix this (other than using another > version of gcc because I am sick of compiling), I would appreciate. I > can offer backtraces or shell access if anybody is interested, just > ask me what you need. This was fixed couple of months ago. Please consider using current svn top of tree, not 2.3 release. -- WBR, Anton Korobeynikov

Jean-Marc Valin wrote: > Duane Storey a ?crit : >> Actually, it might just be an OS "feature".. On most linux and mac >> platforms, the memory managers align memory on proper boundaries -- this >> doesn't occur on most versions of windows. I don't have all the code in >> front of me, but it's possible that it's simply a side effect of windows

Dear llvmdev, I am new to LLVM , but have a task on writing a LLVM backend to generate some architecture specific assembly file. Here is my cygwin build setting: GCC 3.4.4 , BIN UTILITY 2.15 ,and all other packages of the right version listed on the LLVM Getting Started doc. I have successfully built Release 1.6 LLVM. All the tools has been installed there /usr/local/bin . But I

> 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 "msvc-compabile" - isTargetWin32() which means "everything on windows", so

2008/9/21 Anton Korobeynikov <asl at math.spbu.ru>: > Hello, > >> If anybody has an idea of how to fix this (other than using another >> version of gcc because I am sick of compiling), I would appreciate. I >> can offer backtraces or shell access if anybody is interested, just >> ask me what you need. > This was fixed couple of months ago. Please consider

On Thu, Mar 28, 2013 at 1:46 PM, Anton Korobeynikov <asl at math.spbu.ru> wrote: >> Sounds fine to me. I just wanted some convenient and consistent naming. >> I think it conflicts a bit with the triples (-win32 currently means >> msvc I think), > Right. But this is again a historical (and LLVM-specific) artifact, > because I doubt anyone uses such triplet outside to

Hi Anton, Is the patch going to be uploaded to the CVS source? Ashwin On 5/24/06, Evan Cheng <evan.cheng at apple.com> wrote: > > > On May 24, 2006, at 5:03 AM, Anton Korobeynikov wrote: > > > Hello, Ashwin. > > > > You wrote Wednesday, May 24, 2006, 11:25:11 AM: > > > > AC> "Pass::getClassPassInfo<PassClass>() "Pass class

Hello, Jonathan > I thought I'd messed up something related to the linker, > but I couldn't explain why XP would work using the same steps. The only thing comes to my mind seeing this: perl from msysDTK works differently (somehow) on Vista, thus llvm-config is broken which leads to missed libraries, broken dependencies, etc. I'd suggest you to compare stuff on different

On Thu, Mar 28, 2013 at 12:19 PM, Óscar Fuentes <ofv at wanadoo.es> wrote: > Eric Christopher <echristo at gmail.com> writes: > > > In my opinion none of these are irrelevant. Mingw and cygwin are separate > > ABIs that deal with some C compatibility (problems mentioned in this > thread > > are important here too) and give you the ability to work with low

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.

> 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

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