similar to: [LLVMdev] How to create a new pass using Visual Studio

Forwarding to llvmdev ---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: Mikael Lyngvig <mikael at lyngvig.org> Date: Sun, Feb 20, 2011 at 16:02 Subject: Re: [LLVMdev] Windows/Visual Studio 2010 warnings (WARNINGS!) To: Anton Korobeynikov <anton at korobeynikov.info> I was joking about the fact that I am only a Windows user (LLVM initially does look rather *nix biased). But I guess you

Hello > The bitcode was generated by llvm-gcc v2.6 for Mingw32/x86, which is > available for download at the llvm site. > Please let me know, if i should tell more. Well, the answer is pretty obvious then. These calls are not generated by JIT. They are already in your bitcode - they are generated by llvm-gcc. The purpose of these calls were alreade explained by Eli. You should either

Hello Mikael, > Now I recall what the problem was that I had: My code makes use of the Win32 > API and that means pulling in Windows.h, which again pulls in some headers > that make use of the force_inline thingy, which is not supported under > Windows yet. Or you can use windows.h from mingw :) -- With best regards, Anton Korobeynikov Faculty of Mathematics and Mechanics, Saint

Hello, Tim > Would adding cases for these assembly blocks that are in Visual Studio > syntax be enough to enable a working x86-64 JIT target under Windows > builds? I can't pretend to understand this codebase, so if there are > more roadblocks stopping 64-bit JIT on Windows targets I'd be > interested to hear... The following things are needed for enabling win64 JIT in 2.2

> P.S. I was thinking you perhaps could make a blinking button labeled > "Windows" on the front page of http://www.llvm.org, which when clicked > guided people through the steps needed to build on Windows? Shouldn't there be a button entitled "Linux" then? And "Mac OS X" ? And "FreeBSD"? ... -- With best regards, Anton Korobeynikov Faculty of

Hi Anton, You're already a part of the llvm development team by participating actively on the llvm development list :) If you wish we can put you on: http://llvm.cs.uiuc.edu/Developers.html Great to have you on the team, welcome! We (Jeff, Morten, Paolo, the rest of the team and I) are looking forward to cooperate with you and to push win32 and mingw versions even further to stable and

How can a frontend tell LLVM to put a function argument on stack/register/etc? On Thu, Oct 4, 2012 at 5:08 PM, Anton Korobeynikov <asl at math.spbu.ru> wrote: >> 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 >

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

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. The vector is really sotred aligned relative to %esp, but %esp value is not good. This is known problem

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.

> 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

Nothing... I'll show you all the info related to: The intrinsic: def int_soru_sre : Intrinsic<[llvm_void_ty, llvm_i32_ty], [IntrWriteMem]>; The lower instruction (in MIPS): class SORUI<bits<6> op, dag outs, dag ins, string asmstr, list<dag> pattern, InstrItinClass itin>: FI<op, outs, ins, asmstr, pattern, itin> { let isBarrier = 1; // or call,

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? >

2013/3/27 Anton Korobeynikov <asl at math.spbu.ru>: > Hi Eric, > >> From my perspective Win32 is the windows ABI and mingw and cygwin are their own ABIs > No. They are using Windows Platform ABI for almost everything (e.g. > calling API, C runtime, etc.). At least mingw does. The differences > are exactly in unspecified area (e.g. passing / returning structs by >

What if it's already broken? 2013/3/28 Anton Korobeynikov <asl at math.spbu.ru>: >> A more specific question is - if I fix some Clang i686-pc-win32 >> compatibility issue with MSVC for some language feature (e.g. >> returning a struct), >> should I make sure Clang i686-pc-mingw32 behavior is not changed by my >> patches (a) >> or should I make sure

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 not > AC> registered!"" failed: file > AC> "/cygdrive/c/llvm/llvm/include/llvm/PassAnalysisSupport.h", > line 76 > AC> Aborted > Same

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

Should be there On Fri, Nov 16, 2012 at 3:00 PM, NAKAMURA Takumi <geek4civic at gmail.com> wrote: > Anton, please add release_32 also in; > > clang-tools-extra > compiler-rt > dragonegg > libcxxabi > lldb > > They have release_32 in svn. I don't know they might be released, though. > > And, could you suppress generating refs/heads/svn-tags and prune them

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.