similar to: [LLVMdev] transitions from C code to LLVM JIT code and back

> What I have not seen an example of, and want to know if it's > possible, is having LLVM generated code calling back out to plain C > code during its run. When I was first looking at LLVM, I googled a lot, and found somebody saying to do it this way: http://onesadcookie.com/trac/browser/AbandonedExperiments/Argh/CodeGen.g (lines 43-51). I'm pretty sure now though that

Greetings, LLVM wizards. We are using Clang and Orc JIT (v1) to compile and execute C++ code on the fly. If a C++ module calls functions from external libraries, we add them via DynamicLibrary::LoadLibraryPermanently(). The problem we have run into recently is when a module calls a function from the STL -- in particular this swap() function for input streams: #include <fstream>

You can add symbols from Archieve via StaticLibrarySearchGenerator. But it is added recently though On Tue, 27 Aug 2019 at 21:02, Praveen Velliengiri < praveenvelliengiri at gmail.com> wrote: > Hi Geoff, > I tried it, but I can't able to reproduce it. > > Test Program: > #include <fstream> > int main() > { > std::ifstream stream1, stream2; >

On Tue, Aug 27, 2019 at 4:56 PM Praveen Velliengiri <praveenvelliengiri at gmail.com> wrote: > > HI > Did you run the static constructor and destructor? How did you make your process symbols visible to ORC jit? Yes. It's the constructor that generates the undefined symbol error. We use DynamicLibrary::LoadLibraryPermanently(nullptr) to add process symbols. > Could you

I would like to load shared libraries at runtime for use in some JIT'd code. I can't find much about how the JIT resolves symbols, so can somebody answer a few questions for me? 1. Will the symbols from a dlopen'd library with RTLD_GLOBAL be available? In this case I can manually dlopen the libraries prior to the JIT run. 2. Can I derive from ExecutionEngine and override the

Thanks so much! This seems to do the trick. I would have spun my wheels for a long time before discovering all of this, wow. Do I even want to know what additional chickens need to be sacrificed to get this to work on Windows? -- lg > On May 18, 2016, at 1:52 PM, Lang Hames <lhames at gmail.com> wrote: > > Hi Larry, > > You're basically there, but you're hitting

Hi all, I'm struggling to get lli work on qemu-system-arm. I already boot the system with a debian squeeze rootfs which contains a statically cross-compiled lli for armel. When I run ./lli hello.bc, I got the following error msg: ./lli: error creating EE: /lib/: cannot read file data: Is a directory afaik, this error is related to lli using dlopen() with a NULL path to resolve symbols for

Hi Larry, Thanks so much! This seems to do the trick. I would have spun my wheels for > a long time before discovering all of this, wow. No worries. :) I'll try to keep this in mind and make sure I address it in future Kaleidoscope tutorial chapters - these issues tripped me up the first time I encountered them too. Do I even want to know what additional chickens need to be sacrificed

On Jul 2, 2009, at 1:05 AM, Carter Cheng wrote: > I am having some difficulties getting the LLVM JIT to resolve extern > "C" functions which I have defined in source file and invoking them > via EE::runFunction() after generating a Function prototype for it. > Is this possible or do I need to generate a .so for my functions are > link against it? If the JIT needs

Hi, I am having some difficulties getting the LLVM JIT to resolve extern "C" functions which I have defined in source file and invoking them via EE::runFunction() after generating a Function prototype for it. Is this possible or do I need to generate a .so for my functions are link against it? Thanks in advanced, Carter. Sorry for the double post but apparently I mistakenly tagged

>> llvm::sys::DynamicLibrary::LoadLibraryPermanently(nullptr) This is one is a bit tricky and hard to find. I spent quiet some time digging into MC and ORC JIT execution engines trying to find what makes them work. The problem is that this trick (LoadLibraryPermanently) happens inside of EngineBuilder, despite that the functionality belongs to a JIT engine itself, not to the builder. I

On Jan 8, 2013, at 13:55 , "Kaylor, Andrew" <andrew.kaylor at intel.com> wrote: > You need to include 'llvm/ExecutionEngine/JIT.h' (or 'llvm/ExecutionEngine/JIT.h' if you want that engine) from your main file. Including that file forces the JIT static constructor to be linked into your executable. Without it, the JIT static constructor gets optimized out and

When using ORC JIT, I'm having trouble with external function resolution (that is, of a function defined in the app, with C linkage). I add a declaration for the function to my IR, and when I use MCJIT, it finds it and all is well, But when I use ORC JIT (I *think* correctly, at least it closely matches what I see in the tutorial), I get an LLVM error, "Program used external function

hi all, I'm trying to write an LLVM-based interpreter for a small DSL that we have. The language is very simple (essentially a calculator), but I'd like it to execute efficiently. I've been following the tutorial, and have the following code for instantiating an ExecutionEngine: #include <LLVM\ExecutionEngine\JIT.h> #include

Argh. Thanks for the info. We're on Linux. On Fri, Dec 20, 2019 at 3:46 PM Praveen Velliengiri < praveenvelliengiri at gmail.com> wrote: > Hi Geoff, > Gathering from past, I remember that the ORCv2 doesn't support thread > local variable but not sure what is the current status now. What platform > you are on? > CC'ed (Lang hames) he knows exactly what is the

Yes, I confirm. Le ven. 20 déc. 2019 à 19:12, Praveen Velliengiri < praveenvelliengiri at gmail.com> a écrit : > Hi, > Orc v2 is different from the internal structure then Orc v1 not just in > API level. > TLS support is not in ORC for a long time at least I'm aware of , Could > you please confirm that ORC v1 actually compiles and run the code with > Thread locals?

Rick Mann <rmann at latencyzero.com> writes: > On Jan 8, 2013, at 13:55 , "Kaylor, Andrew" <andrew.kaylor at intel.com> wrote: > >> You need to include 'llvm/ExecutionEngine/JIT.h' (or >> llvm/ExecutionEngine/JIT.h' if you want that engine) from your main >> file. Including that file forces the JIT static constructor to be >> linked

And yet the same C++ code using thread-local variables works fine (or seems to) when compiled with Orc v1. Does the change to the Orc API really make thread-local storage more difficult? On Fri, Dec 20, 2019 at 3:52 PM Praveen Velliengiri < praveenvelliengiri at gmail.com> wrote: > Oh, I think Linux don't have support for TLS. > > On Fri, 20 Dec 2019 at 20:19, Geoff Levner

Hi Christian Your use case seems to have similar requirements as remote JITing in ORC. So far I haven't used that part myself and I am sure Lang can tell you much more about it. However, this comment on the RemoteObjectClientLayer class sounds promising for your questions (1) and (2): /// Sending relocatable objects to the server (rather than fully relocated /// bits) allows JIT'd code

Hi Rick, You need to include 'llvm/ExecutionEngine/JIT.h' (or 'llvm/ExecutionEngine/JIT.h' if you want that engine) from your main file. Including that file forces the JIT static constructor to be linked into your executable. Without it, the JIT static constructor gets optimized out and you get the result you're seeing. -Andy -----Original Message----- From: