similar to: [LLVMdev] PowerPC (darwin) 128-bit long double

Hi, I think Dale meant to post this to ask the whole group, instead of just me. Basically, I'd like to build llvm-gcc 4.2 on host i686-apple-darwin9 for target powerpc-apple-darwin8. So far my efforts have failed. If you know the answer or can point me in the right direction, I'd be much obliged. Thx, Jose > Hi Dale, > > Is there a way to get llvm 4.2 and os x 10.4 to work

Thanks again, Dale. Hopefully, someone has the answer. Jose -----Original Message----- From: Dale Johannesen [mailto:dalej at apple.com] Sent: Friday, January 29, 2010 3:52 PM To: Jose Rangel Cc: Dale Johannesen Subject: Re: [LLVMdev] llvm-gcc 4.0 question On Jan 29, 2010, at 3:13 PMPST, Jose Rangel wrote: > Hi Dale, > > Is there a way to get llvm 4.2 and os x 10.4 to work

On Jan 29, 2010, at 2:55 PMPST, Jose Rangel wrote: > Hi Dale, > > Thanks for getting back. I may not be able to switch to llvm 4.2 at > this > time. I did try: > > llvm-gcc --emit-llvm -c sumarray.c -o sumarray.bc > llc -march=ppc32 sumarray.bc > gcc -arch ppc sumarray.s > > And this produced a ppc binary that worked (at least in this case). > > Do you

Chandler Carruth <chandlerc at google.com> wrote on 22.10.2012 20:53:54: > So, I'm not really sure if this is the right approach. I'd like some > folks from the LLVM side of things to chime in. > > In general, I'm not certain we want to continue growing our dependence > on the signext and zeroext attributes on return types, or whether we > want to do the

Rafael Espíndola <rafael.espindola at gmail.com> wrote on 23.10.2012 18:00:36: > > Which triple would you suggest to use for this? > > > > i386-apple-darwin ? > > i386-pc-linux-gnu ? > > i386-unknown-unknown ? > > > > (I don't have Darwin systems to test on myself. I could test either of > > the latter on Linux/Intel ...) > > If

Hi Dale, Thanks for getting back. I may not be able to switch to llvm 4.2 at this time. I did try: llvm-gcc --emit-llvm -c sumarray.c -o sumarray.bc llc -march=ppc32 sumarray.bc gcc -arch ppc sumarray.s And this produced a ppc binary that worked (at least in this case). Do you know if this approach is worthwhile? Thx, Jose -----Original Message----- From: Dale Johannesen [mailto:dalej at

Hi everyone, I don't believe that anyone is currently using (a recent) LLVM on PowerPC/Darwin. As far as I know, Apple stopped supporting PowerPC hardware years ago. There is a significant amount of code in the PowerPC backend dedicated to Darwin support and removing it would make maintaining the rest of the backend easier. If anyone expects upcoming LLVM releases to continue to support

On Dec 7, 2007, at 4:40 PM, Dale Johannesen wrote: > So I couldn't get exceptions to work on PPC darwin. After much > digging and confusion, there seem > to be two separate issues. Ok. > The gcc testsuite is running the version of the unwinding code that > was built with the local (llvm-)gcc, > which doesn't work because nobody has implemented >

Adrian Prantl via llvm-dev wrote on Mon, 02 Nov 2015: > Looking at the code in clang CGDebugInfo just passes through the > width of the type as it is described by the TypeInfo, which in turn > is defined by the Target. At the moment I do not understand why an > x86_fp80 is reported to be 128 bits wide. The x86-64 and Darwin/i386 ABI define the size of the 80 bits extended

Hello Ulrich, Thank you for a good explanation of the different variants. 2014-07-30 21:29 GMT+02:00 Ulrich Weigand <Ulrich.Weigand at de.ibm.com>: > Hi David, > >> I'm trying to understand which ABIs are supported in the PowerPC >> backend and I'm getting a bit confused. Here's what I've gathered so >> far alongside with some questions. > >

----- Original Message ----- > From: "Ulrich Weigand" <Ulrich.Weigand at de.ibm.com> > To: "David Wiberg" <dwiberg at gmail.com> > Cc: llvmdev at cs.uiuc.edu > Sent: Wednesday, July 30, 2014 2:29:22 PM > Subject: Re: [LLVMdev] [PowerPC] ABI questions > > Hi David, > > > I'm trying to understand which ABIs are supported in the

On Nov 1, 2010, at 12:03 PM, Jonas Maebe wrote: > > On 01 Nov 2010, at 18:37, Duncan Sands wrote: > >> I think the "fact" that x86 long double is 16 byte aligned on x86-64 is >> hard-wired in. > > Note that it's not just about alignment, but mainly about the reserved storage size. > >> I'm not sure how hard this would be to control via a

> Which triple would you suggest to use for this? > > i386-apple-darwin ? > i386-pc-linux-gnu ? > i386-unknown-unknown ? > > (I don't have Darwin systems to test on myself. I could test either of > the latter on Linux/Intel ...) If they pass with i386-unknown-unknown, that is probably the best. > Thanks, > Ulrich > Thanks, Rafael

Please excuse hobbiest-level question. Darwin 11+ enables thread_local variables using system-level supports. I have an interest in enabling TLS on darwin < 11 using emulated-tls. This can be enabled with a few modest patches: ========================== --- a/include/llvm/ADT/Triple.h.orig 2018-10-02 17:38:10.000000000 -0700 +++ b/include/llvm/ADT/Triple.h 2018-10-02 17:38:58.000000000

On 01 Nov 2010, at 18:37, Duncan Sands wrote: > I think the "fact" that x86 long double is 16 byte aligned on x86-64 is > hard-wired in. Note that it's not just about alignment, but mainly about the reserved storage size. > I'm not sure how hard this would be to control via a > command line option (i.e. -m96bit-long-double). Is there no different way to go about

Rafael Espíndola <rafael.espindola at gmail.com> wrote on 23.10.2012 15:54:47: > > Well, I guess the "exact triple" would specify Intel, right? In which > > case the IR wouldn't really have to change ... > > > > However, this would mean a whole bunch of test cases either wouldn't > > be executed at all on non-Intel platforms, or else we'd

Hi all, I'm trying to understand which ABIs are supported in the PowerPC backend and I'm getting a bit confused. Here's what I've gathered so far alongside with some questions. - In PPCSubtarget.h there's DarwinABI, SVR4ABI and ELFv2ABI. - The CodeGenerator documentation claims that the AIX PowerPC ABI is followed (with some deviations). Is this refering to the DarwinABI? -

Duncan Sands <duncan.sands at gmail.com> wrote on 24.10.2012 08:20:07: > Hal Finkel <hfinkel at anl.gov> wrote: > >> Chris wrote some notes about this: > >> http://www.nondot.org/sabre/LLVMNotes/ExtendedIntegerResults.txt > >> The plan seems sensible to me, but was blocked by not having a good > >> way of attaching the information to

On 30 Jul 2014, at 21:29, Ulrich Weigand wrote: > The ELFv1 ABI is used on 64-bit big-endian Linux and AIX. There's one small difference between the two: with the 64 bit ELFv1/ SVR4 ABI, tail padding for structs passed by value is only performed in case the struct is larger than 8 bytes, while for AIX 64 bit it's always done. As an aside, on Darwin/ppc64 it's done if the

I am getting assembler errors on clang-llvm-2.9 output for a program with exceptions that I do not get when using the installed g++ Mac OS-X 10.4 powerpc-apple-darwin > as -version Apple Computer, Inc. version cctools-590.23.2.obj~17, GNU assembler version 1.38 the folks at gnu-binutils assure me this is an assembler bug, but also that this isn't a recognizable "gnu"