similar to: [LLVMdev] GC patches again

>> Attached. This makes the last change set compatible with the new >> hand-written lexer—a whole one line change! >> >> See the readme file in the zip archive. Hi Gordon, here's some feedback: include/llvm/Support/StringPool.h (+124) lib/Support/StringPool.cpp (+52) A reference-counted string interning facility. Will be used by the next patch. This

On 2008-04-28, at 21:19, Lane Schwartz wrote: > On Mon, Apr 28, 2008 at 2:13 PM, Gordon Henriksen <gordonhenriksen at mac.com > > wrote: > >>> If so, then a Collector plugin would need to have info about every >>> supported backend lays out the runtime stack? >> >> Yes. This information is actually available in a target-independent >>

On Mon, Apr 28, 2008 at 2:13 PM, Gordon Henriksen <gordonhenriksen at mac.com> wrote: > > If so, then a Collector plugin would need to have info about every > > supported backend lays out the runtime stack? > > Yes. This information is actually available in a target-independent > fashion with LLVM, so the Collector interface is target-independent. A > backend

On Mon, 2008-04-28 at 21:39 -0500, Lane Schwartz wrote: > On Mon, Apr 28, 2008 at 8:31 PM, Gordon Henriksen > <gordonhenriksen at mac.com> wrote: > > On 2008-04-28, at 21:19, Lane Schwartz wrote: > > > > > On Mon, Apr 28, 2008 at 2:13 PM, Gordon Henriksen <gordonhenriksen at mac.com > > >> stack and discover the return address of each call frame.

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 Apr 28, 2008, at 14:28, Lane Schwartz wrote: > On Sun, Apr 27, 2008 at 9:34 PM, Gordon Henriksen > <gordonhenriksen at mac.com> wrote: > >> As for the compiler plugin interface, I suggest you ignore it >> initially and use the provided shadow-stack option for the time >> being. The shadow stack generates significantly suboptimal code, >> but will

On Mon, Apr 28, 2008 at 8:31 PM, Gordon Henriksen <gordonhenriksen at mac.com> wrote: > On 2008-04-28, at 21:19, Lane Schwartz wrote: > > > On Mon, Apr 28, 2008 at 2:13 PM, Gordon Henriksen <gordonhenriksen at mac.com > > > wrote: > > > >>> If so, then a Collector plugin would need to have info about every > >>> supported backend

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 Sun, Apr 27, 2008 at 9:34 PM, Gordon Henriksen <gordonhenriksen at mac.com> wrote: > As for the compiler plugin interface, I suggest you ignore it > initially and use the provided shadow-stack option for the time being. > The shadow stack generates significantly suboptimal code, but will let > you avoid writing some platform-specific code. Instead, simply copy > the

On Mon, Apr 21, 2008 at 8:13 PM, Gordon Henriksen <gordonhenriksen at mac.com> wrote: > > Hi Terence, > > > I think you're getting hung up on the details of the shadow stack collector. > The shadow stack is a GC that is possible within this framework, but of > course could be implemented without any special support. Its presence is > more misleading than anything

Gordon Henriksen wrote: > On 2008-01-07, at 05:29, Jon Harrop wrote: > >> On Monday 07 January 2008 02:32:47 Gordon Henriksen wrote: >> >>> Everything described in GarbageCollection.html should now be live. >>> Phew! >>> >> This is wonderful news! Are there any example programs using these >> GCs? > > The division of labor is

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

On Apr 28, 2008, at 10:50, Jonathan S. Shapiro wrote: > On Sun, 2008-04-27 at 22:34 -0400, Gordon Henriksen wrote: >> On 2008-04-27, at 21:29, Lane Schwartz wrote: >>> Since this is a simple copying collector, the functions >>> llvm_gc_read and llvm_gc_write won't really do much: >>> void *llvm_gc_read(void *ObjPtr, void **FieldPtr) { return

On 2008-01-07, at 05:29, Jon Harrop wrote: > On Monday 07 January 2008 02:32:47 Gordon Henriksen wrote: > >> Everything described in GarbageCollection.html should now be live. >> Phew! >> > > This is wonderful news! Are there any example programs using these > GCs? The division of labor is such that the user program must provide the stack walker (in

On 2008-04-27, at 21:29, Lane Schwartz wrote: > Hi guys, Hi Lane! This is a lot of questions. I'm not going to answer each individually, but will instead give general guidance to help you avoid the pain points… > I somehow need to inform the garbage collection runtime (my > copycollector.c) about my variables - specifically about gc roots. > So, after I get new memory

Hi Terence, I think you're getting hung up on the details of the shadow stack collector. The shadow stack is a GC that is possible within this framework, but of course could be implemented without any special support. Its presence is more misleading than anything else. Taking a step back, the concepts are: llvm.gcroot instructs the code generator --> My GC needs to be able to

On Sun, 2008-04-27 at 22:34 -0400, Gordon Henriksen wrote: > On 2008-04-27, at 21:29, Lane Schwartz wrote: > > Since this is a simple copying collector, the functions llvm_gc_read > > and llvm_gc_write won't really do much: > > void *llvm_gc_read(void *ObjPtr, void **FieldPtr) { return > > *FieldPtr; } > > void llvm_gc_write(void *V, void *ObjPtr, void

On Apr 20, 2008, at 6:52 PM, Gordon Henriksen wrote: > On 2008-04-20, at 21:05, Terence Parr wrote: > >> On Apr 20, 2008, at 5:36 PM, Gordon Henriksen wrote: >> >>> Since the semispace heap doesn't actually work (it's an example, >>> at best), I suggest you simply copy the stack visitor into your >>> project; it's only a dozen lines of

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 2008-04-20, at 21:05, Terence Parr wrote: > On Apr 20, 2008, at 5:36 PM, Gordon Henriksen wrote: > >> Since the semispace heap doesn't actually work (it's an example, at >> best), I suggest you simply copy the stack visitor into your >> project; it's only a dozen lines of code or so. > > > Ok, copying; can't find ShadowStackEntry though.