similar to: [LLVMdev] obtaining the address of an instruction...?

On Nov 4, 2007, at 01:00, Mark Oskin wrote: > I'm currently working on a compiler pass, where it would be vastly > simplified if I could obtain the address of an instruction. Any > suggestions on how to do this? Effectively, I'm trying to translate > code that looks like this: > > instruction > branch > > into: > > instruction > call

Thanks for the review Gordon. On Tue, Nov 1, 2011 at 2:21 AM, Gordon Henriksen <gordonhenriksen at mac.com>wrote: > On 2011-10-31, at 17:21, Nicolas Geoffray wrote: > > > Here's a patch to allow a GCStrategy to customize the places where it > wants to insert safe points. I'm not sure who maintains the GC code today > in LLVM (I'd be happy to take ownership, if

On Aug 14, 2007, at 4:35 AM, Gordon Henriksen wrote: > On Aug 14, 2007, at 06:24, Gordon Henriksen wrote: > >> The two major problems I had really boil down to identifying GC >> points in machine code and statically identifying live roots at >> those GC points, both problems common to many collection >> techniques. Looking at the problem from that perspective

On Nov 1, 2011, at 4:47 AM, Nicolas Geoffray <nicolas.geoffray at gmail.com> wrote: > Thanks for the review Gordon. > > On Tue, Nov 1, 2011 at 2:21 AM, Gordon Henriksen <gordonhenriksen at mac.com> wrote: > On 2011-10-31, at 17:21, Nicolas Geoffray wrote: > > > Here's a patch to allow a GCStrategy to customize the places where it wants to insert safe points.

On Aug 14, 2007, at 00:23, Chris Lattner wrote: > On Mon, 13 Aug 2007, Gordon Henriksen wrote: > >> Changing these structures breaks binary compatibility (including C >> interop). > > If that is so, and if there is no way around this, then it makes > sense to develop some compatibility mode. How does native C code > generate these tables? I might've

On Aug 14, 2007, at 06:24, Gordon Henriksen wrote: > The two major problems I had really boil down to identifying GC > points in machine code and statically identifying live roots at > those GC points, both problems common to many collection > techniques. Looking at the problem from that perspective makes the > problem much more tractable, actually… Chris, This is much

Hi all, I need to add thread-switching support to Unladen Swallow's JIT, and LLVM's safe point support looks like a good way to get code into all the right places. However, http://llvm.org/docs/GarbageCollection.html#collector-algos points out that there's no way to emit code at safe points yet, and there are no loop safe points at all. So I'll be trying to implement them. Is

Hi Jeffrey, On 2009-06-22, at 01:49, Jeffrey Yasskin wrote: > I need to add thread-switching support to Unladen Swallow's JIT, and > LLVM's safe point support looks like a good way to get code into all > the right places. However, http://llvm.org/docs/GarbageCollection.html#collector-algos > points out that there's no way to emit code at safe points yet, and >

Hi, I need to do an inverse-depth-first iteration over the basic blocks in a machine function (i.e. starting from the last block and following predecessor edges) for a liveness analysis I'm writing. idf_iterator seems like it's almost the class I need, but it starts at the first block in the function at present, rather than the last one (because of the specialisiation of GraphTraits for

On Tue, Jun 23, 2009 at 4:18 AM, Gordon Henriksen <gordonhenriksen at me.com>wrote: > Hi Jeffrey, > On 2009-06-22, at 01:49, Jeffrey Yasskin wrote: > > I need to add thread-switching support to Unladen Swallow's JIT, and LLVM's > safe point support looks like a good way to get code into all the right > places. However, >

Holger. > You can find out what exactly leaks with the help of valgrind. It seems, that Paolo is on Mac OS X. No valgrind there :( -- With best regards, Anton Korobeynikov. Faculty of Mathematics & Mechanics, Saint Petersburg State University.

On 2011-10-31, at 17:21, Nicolas Geoffray wrote: > Here's a patch to allow a GCStrategy to customize the places where it wants to insert safe points. I'm not sure who maintains the GC code today in LLVM (I'd be happy to take ownership, if needed). > > The patch just adds up a custom safepoints flag, similar to the way the GCStrategy can customize intrinsics lowering, or

I have an issue with the OCaml build system and the ExecutionEngine. PR2128 has a patch to change the Interpreter to use libffi. This breaks test/Bindings/Ocaml/executionengine.ml because OCaml doesn't try to link with libffi, even though llvm-config knows that we should: $ Debug/bin/llvm-config --ldflags interpreter -L/home/nicholas/llvm-commit/Debug/lib -lpthread -lffi -ldl -lm

Hi Chris, Gordon, Here's a patch to allow a GCStrategy to customize the places where it wants to insert safe points. I'm not sure who maintains the GC code today in LLVM (I'd be happy to take ownership, if needed). The patch just adds up a custom safepoints flag, similar to the way the GCStrategy can customize intrinsics lowering, or roots initialization. It works pretty well, as

On Aug 19, 2007, at 20:43, Chris Lattner wrote: > On Aug 14, 2007, at 4:35 AM, Gordon Henriksen wrote: > >> On Aug 14, 2007, at 06:24, Gordon Henriksen wrote: >> >>> The two major problems I had really boil down to identifying GC >>> points in machine code and statically identifying live roots at >>> those GC points, both problems common to many

On 2009-01-19, at 13:50, Nick Lewycky wrote: > I have an issue with the OCaml build system and the ExecutionEngine. > > PR2128 has a patch to change the Interpreter to use libffi. This > breaks test/Bindings/Ocaml/executionengine.ml because OCaml doesn't > try to link with libffi, even though llvm-config knows that we should: > > $ Debug/bin/llvm-config --ldflags

I am trying to build the latest release candidate and have run into a bit of a problem. When I run ./configure, I get: GlusterFS configure summary =========================== FUSE client : no Infiniband verbs : no epoll IO multiplex : yes Berkeley-DB : no libglusterfsclient : yes mod_glusterfs : no () argp-standalone : no I am going to need the gluster FUSE client now

Devang Patel wrote: > On Jul 25, 2008, at 12:58 PM, Marc de Kruijf wrote: > > I'd like to write a pass that does both: implements a code transformation and saves information that can be accessed by subsequent passes. > > Ideally, we want to use two separate pass. However, it is quiet possible that your requirement is unique. Would it be possible to provide more info. on what

Hi, I've been experimenting with global isel over the last few weeks and it is such a vast improvement over the SelectionDAG for the AMDGPU target that I would really like to begin using it as soon as possible. Given the lack of a replacement for SelectionDAG's legalizer / combiner, and how much work this will be to implement, I think the fastest path to doing this would be to run some

Dear All, Here's a question Vikram and I received. Is the LLVM JIT thread safe? -- John T. -------------- next part -------------- An embedded message was scrubbed... From: "Adve, Vikram Sadanand" <vadve at uiuc.edu> Subject: Fwd: LLVM and threading Date: Thu, 1 Nov 2007 09:48:59 -0500 Size: 3037 URL: