Displaying 20 results from an estimated 1000 matches similar to: "[LLVMdev] [Oink-devel] Elsa and LLVM"
2007 Dec 21
0
[LLVMdev] [Oink-devel] Status of Elsa->LLVM
On 12/21/07, Richard Pennington <rich at pennware.com> wrote:
> I'm a little further along now. I've started to put together a simple
> driver for Elsa and LLVM that I'm calling "ellsif" (cute name, I think
> it works).
Er. Hm. Can you explain the name? The problem with names like
"ellsif" is that it sounds like "else if". I like the
2007 Dec 23
1
[LLVMdev] [Oink-devel] Status of Elsa->LLVM
Daniel Wilkerson wrote:
>> I've build gcc many times over the years for different target processors
>> and was never able to get my head around it internally. It is incredibly
>> complex. I also didn't like the fact that I had to have N copies of gcc
>> to support N processors.
>
> Scott McPeak is rather familiar with the internals of gcc and edg and
>
2007 Dec 22
0
[LLVMdev] [Oink-devel] Status of Elsa->LLVM
> I've build gcc many times over the years for different target processors
> and was never able to get my head around it internally. It is incredibly
> complex. I also didn't like the fact that I had to have N copies of gcc
> to support N processors.
Scott McPeak is rather familiar with the internals of gcc and edg and
says elsa is far simpler.
> I became interested in
2007 Dec 21
0
[LLVMdev] [Oink-devel] Status of Elsa->LLVM
I would really like to avoid shipping multiple preprocessors as part
of the standard elsa/oink project.
On 12/21/07, Taras Glek <tglek at mozilla.com> wrote:
>
> >> Adding test/ofmt.i as a preprocessed C file
> >> Phase: Preprocessing
> >> test/ofmt.i is ignored during this phase
> >>
> >
> > What preprocessor are you using? Taras has
2007 Dec 23
1
[LLVMdev] Status of Elsa->LLVM
Chris Lattner wrote:
> On Dec 22, 2007, at 2:40 AM, Richard Pennington wrote:
>
>> Does Elsa provide an advantage over g++? For me, understanding it is a
>> big plus. ;-) In addition, Elsa has a Berkeley-like license which I
>> prefer.
>
> Ok. If you're not planning on extending the front-end,
> understandability doesn't really matter ;-). I get
2007 Dec 21
5
[LLVMdev] Status of Elsa->LLVM
I'm a little further along now. I've started to put together a simple
driver for Elsa and LLVM that I'm calling "ellsif" (cute name, I think
it works).
The file being compiled is a "printf" function. Here are timing results
for optimized and unoptimized runs:
[~/elsa/ellsif] dev% ./ellsif -v test/ofmt.i -time-actions
Adding test/ofmt.i as a preprocessed C file
2007 Dec 22
5
[LLVMdev] Status of Elsa->LLVM
Chris Lattner wrote:
> On Dec 21, 2007, at 1:08 PM, Richard Pennington wrote:
>
>> I'm a little further along now. I've started to put together a simple
>> driver for Elsa and LLVM that I'm calling "ellsif" (cute name, I think
>> it works).
>>
>> The file being compiled is a "printf" function. Here are timing
>> results
2007 Dec 21
1
[LLVMdev] [Oink-devel] Status of Elsa->LLVM
>> Adding test/ofmt.i as a preprocessed C file
>> Phase: Preprocessing
>> test/ofmt.i is ignored during this phase
>>
>
> What preprocessor are you using? Taras has already found one that is
> working for him and that is licensed under BSD and that has some
> features in it that he needs for source to source transformation. I
> would like us to all
2007 Dec 22
0
[LLVMdev] Status of Elsa->LLVM
On Dec 22, 2007, at 2:40 AM, Richard Pennington wrote:
> Does Elsa provide an advantage over g++? For me, understanding it is a
> big plus. ;-) In addition, Elsa has a Berkeley-like license which I
> prefer.
Ok. If you're not planning on extending the front-end,
understandability doesn't really matter ;-). I get where you're
coming from though!
> Since I only
2007 Dec 22
0
[LLVMdev] Status of Elsa->LLVM
On Dec 21, 2007, at 1:08 PM, Richard Pennington wrote:
> I'm a little further along now. I've started to put together a simple
> driver for Elsa and LLVM that I'm calling "ellsif" (cute name, I think
> it works).
>
> The file being compiled is a "printf" function. Here are timing
> results
> for optimized and unoptimized runs:
Cool, this is
2007 Dec 17
0
[LLVMdev] Elsa and LLVM and LLVM submissions
I used &Idx[0]. In future, please avoid tabs in your patch.
I applied your patch.
http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/pipermail/llvm-commits/Week-of-Mon-20071217/056403.html
-
Devang
On Dec 17, 2007, at 2:57 AM, Richard Pennington wrote:
> Devang Patel wrote:
>> On Dec 15, 2007, at 12:15 PM, Richard Pennington wrote:
>>> I got the current version of LLVM via svn yesterday and
2007 Dec 15
2
[LLVMdev] Elsa and LLVM and LLVM submissions
Hi,
I've been writing an Elsa to LLVM interface.
It has been going very well, I think both sets of software are very nice.
At this point I've been able to compile and run a small program (sieve.c).
I've also compiled a pretty complete version of printf(). (It seemed like
a good choice because it touches many data types, varargs, etc.)
I've had to make quite a few changes to Elsa
2007 Dec 17
2
[LLVMdev] Elsa and LLVM and LLVM submissions
Devang Patel wrote:
> On Dec 15, 2007, at 12:15 PM, Richard Pennington wrote:
>
>> I got the current version of LLVM via svn yesterday and modified my
>> code to
>> use the LLVMFoldingBuilder. Very nice!
>>
>> My question is this: I noticed that the folding builder doesn't fold
>> some
>> operations, e.g. casts. Is there some reason why? If
2007 Dec 17
0
[LLVMdev] Elsa and LLVM and LLVM submissions
On Dec 15, 2007, at 12:15 PM, Richard Pennington wrote:
> I got the current version of LLVM via svn yesterday and modified my
> code to
> use the LLVMFoldingBuilder. Very nice!
>
> My question is this: I noticed that the folding builder doesn't fold
> some
> operations, e.g. casts. Is there some reason why? If I implemented
> some of
> these unhandled cases
2007 Dec 09
1
[LLVMdev] LLVM for static code analysis
Hi,
Apart from the Calysto project (
http://www.cs.ubc.ca/~babic/index_calysto.htm), is there any other static
code analysis tool based of the LLVM framework ?
Calysto may be great but it seems that the source is not available (yet?).
I was quite excited by Oink/Elsa few years ago but the project is almost
dead even if the C++ parser is far from being complete.
It seems to me that everything is
2009 Aug 03
0
[LLVMdev] inline asm question
2009/8/2 Richard Pennington <rich at pennware.com>:
> Eli Friedman wrote:
>> 2009/8/2 Richard Pennington <rich at pennware.com>:
>>> The following fails on x86_64 because of the output constraint '0'.
>>> My question is, is this legal. LLVM complains about the size difference
>>> (32 vs 64), but it is the same register (ax).
>>>
2008 May 14
3
[LLVMdev] Help needed after hiatus
Hi,
I've restarted my Elsa/LLVM project after three months of having real
life intrude. I upgraded my LLVM source to the current trunk. I had to
make a few changes to my source, e.g. LLVMFoldingBuilder became
IRBuilder and several instances of "new" became "Create".
Now, a test case that previously succeeded fails. I run the following
script:
#!/bin/sh
if [ 1 -ne 0 ]
2004 Oct 29
2
Issue with two domains in one LDAP tree
Hi,
I've just moved a second Samba domain to LDAP -- it works great! However, the
first domain is now dead in the water. It refuses to autenticate, and from
the logs it looks like it's not find the SambaDomainName entry in the LDAP
tree. Here is a diagram of how my LDAP tree is set up.
dc=mycompany,dc=com
|___ ou=computers
|___ ou=people
|___ ou=groups
|___ sambaDomain=domain1
|___
2009 Aug 17
1
[LLVMdev] Debug information and bitcode linking patch
On Sun, Aug 16, 2009 at 11:47 AM, Richard Pennington<rich at pennware.com> wrote:
> Richard Pennington wrote:
>>
>> Hi,
>>
>> The enclosed patch preserves debug information about compilation units,
>> functions, and line number information when doing bitcode linking. I'm not
>> easily able to try this for non-bitcode linking. Could someone familiar
2008 Jul 18
0
[LLVMdev] binutils + gdb/insight targeted to LLVM
On Jul 17, 2008, at 7:51 PM, Richard Pennington wrote:
> Hi,
>
> As part of my work with Elsa/LLVM I've been trying to wean myself from
> gcc, I'm using my own preprocessor now (to eliminate gcc -E) and have
> been calling ld and as directly.
You should consider using the clang preprocessor :)
> My question is: What assembler does the LLVM PIC target use? I'd