similar to: [LLVMdev] JIT question: Inner workings of getPointerToFunction()

Hi, I was just reading through the Kaleidoscope tutorial (which is greatly written and understandable, thanks! ) hoping to get some glimpse about the workings of the JIT and the optimizations that are done at run time. I am curious as to how LLVM's JIT dynamically generates native code from bit code at run time and runs that code (I think my question is also somewhat more general in the sense

I have a function in llvm ir as follows: def [2 x [3 x double]] @fun() { return [ ... ]; // a [2 x [3 x double]] constant } I would like to JIT this function in C. I first get the void pointer using: void *FPtr = TheExecutionEngine->getPointerToFunction( func ); Then I need to conver this void pointer to the corresponding C function pointer type, and then call the function

On Mon, Aug 6, 2012 at 9:35 AM, Peng Cheng <gm4cheng at gmail.com> wrote: > I have a function in llvm ir as follows: > > def [2 x [3 x double]] @fun() > { > return [ ... ]; // a [2 x [3 x double]] constant > } > > I would like to JIT this function in C. > > I first get the void pointer using: > > void *FPtr =

Carter Cheng wrote: > I have tracing the calls to materializeFunction in the LLVM code in hopes of determining how to properly utilize this function but from my explorations I gather it's just a hook which is called by the JIT system and I would mostly have to do the work myself. > > What is the preferred way to inject a llvm:Function which contains basic blocks into the Module +

On Wed, Feb 17, 2010 at 6:29 AM, Conrado Miranda <miranda.conrado at gmail.com> wrote: > First, you have to call llvm-g++ to use the llvm-gcc front end, but it > doesn't matter here. I got the compile command from the Kaleidoscope documentation. > I'd like to suggest that you use pastebin to put your code and the send us > the link, so that we can download it. The

First, you have to call llvm-g++ to use the llvm-gcc front end, but it doesn't matter here. I'd like to suggest that you use pastebin to put your code and the send us the link, so that we can download it. The problem is that TheExecutionEngine is set to NULL (maybe because of a previous error), but it will be really better if you use pastebin. On Wed, Feb 17, 2010 at 6:01 AM, Todd Rovito

I am new to llvm so I might be missing a critical step. My system is Fedora 12 but this also happens in Mac OS X 10.6.2. Here are the steps I used to compile llvm: export TARGETS=x86,x86_64,cpp export INSTALLDIR=/home/rovitotv/llvm ../llvm-2.6/configure --prefix=$INSTALLDIR --enable-bindings=none --enable-targets=$TARGETS --enable-optimized --with-llvmgccdir=$INSTALLDIR

Hi Dmitri, You might want to try replacing the call to JMM->invalidInstructionCache() with a call to TheExecutionEngine->finalizeObject(). If you are getting a non-NULL pointer from getPointerToFunction but it crashes when you try to call it, that is most likely because the memory for the generated code has not been marked as executable. That happens inside finalizeObject, which also

Hello, So the current JIT will be superseded by the MCJIT completely and no further development should be expected for the current JIT? In any case, I am definitely interested in submitting a patch if you could help me by sending me in the right direction, since I really want this working. I managed to reproduce this behavior in LLVM 3.0 by modifying llc to read my .bc file and try to JIT the

----- Original Message ---- > From: OvermindDL1 <overminddl1 at gmail.com> > To: LLVM Developers Mailing List <llvmdev at cs.uiuc.edu> > Sent: Thu, November 19, 2009 6:12:47 AM > Subject: Re: [LLVMdev] fastcc and ExecutionEngine::getPointerToFunction() > > Er... Sending this to the list instead of the parent... > > On Thu, Nov 19, 2009 at 4:49 AM, Hans

Hans Wennborg wrote: > Yesterday I realised that if a Function has the calling convention set > to "fast", then it is a bad idea to call it through the function pointer > one gets from ExecutionEngine::getPointerToFunction(). > > The problem is that when calling it from my C++ program, the call will > be made C-style, while the function expects to be called the fastcc

Hi Andrew, Am 04.06.2013 02:13, schrieb Kaylor, Andrew: > Hi Dmitri, > > You might want to try replacing the call to JMM->invalidInstructionCache() with a call to TheExecutionEngine->finalizeObject(). If you are getting a non-NULL pointer from getPointerToFunction but it crashes when you try to call it, that is most likely because the memory for the generated code has not been

Yesterday I realised that if a Function has the calling convention set to "fast", then it is a bad idea to call it through the function pointer one gets from ExecutionEngine::getPointerToFunction(). The problem is that when calling it from my C++ program, the call will be made C-style, while the function expects to be called the fastcc way. Could LLVM either warn the user of this,

Thanks for the quick reply and fix. Now it just means I have to hunt further in exploring why, in my simple test program, replacing the following line of code: GlobalVariable* global = new GlobalVariable(*MyModule, IntegerType::get(getGlobalContext(), 32), false, GlobalValue::ExternalLinkage, 0, "global"); with the following line of code: GlobalVariable* global = new

On Apr 18, 2008, at 1:40 PM, Nicolas Geoffray wrote: > Hi everyone, > > I would like to apply the following patch (java-materialize.patch) > in order to materialize Java functions in vmkit. The current > implementation is not satisfactory because the materializeFunction > of a module provider is not supposed to do anything but read the > bitcode, which is not the case

Er... Sending this to the list instead of the parent... On Thu, Nov 19, 2009 at 4:49 AM, Hans Wennborg <hans at hanshq.net> wrote: > Yesterday I realised that if a Function has the calling convention set > to "fast", then it is a bad idea to call it through the function pointer > one gets from ExecutionEngine::getPointerToFunction(). > > The problem is that when

Hi,all I tried to run the generated whole-program bitcode of BIND,but I got some information: 0 lli 0x0000000000feda16 1 lli 0x0000000000fed88f 2 libpthread.so.0 0x0000003df340eee0 3 libc.so.6 0x0000003df28332f5 gsignal + 53 4 libc.so.6 0x0000003df2834b20 abort + 384 5 libc.so.6 0x0000003df282c2fa __assert_fail + 234 6 lli

With LLVM 3.8 the JIT compiler engine generates an AVX512 instruction although I target an 'avx2' CPU (intel Core I7). I just downloaded the most recent 3.8 and still it happens. It happens with this input module: target datalayout = "e-m:e-i64:64-f80:128-n8:16:32:64-S128" define void @module_cFFEMJ(i64 %lo, i64 %hi, i64 %myId, i1 %ordered, i64 %start, i32* noalias align 32

Hi! I have this scenario: executionEngine->getPointerToFunction fails because a symbol can not be resolved. What can I do to catch this error? is an exception thrown? currently the program simply exits. returning NULL would be ok too. -Jochen

Can you be more precise about where the error occurs? Depending on where it is, LLVM may or may not be able to propagate the error safely. Reid On Tue, Oct 26, 2010 at 4:05 PM, Jochen Wilhelmy <j.wilhelmy at arcor.de> wrote: > Hi! > > I have this scenario: > executionEngine->getPointerToFunction fails because a symbol can not be > resolved. > > What can I do to