similar to: [LLVMdev] Odd problem with command line options

Displaying 20 results from an estimated 500 matches similar to: "[LLVMdev] Odd problem with command line options"

2008 May 30
0
[LLVMdev] Odd problem with command line options
> I'm linking a program (my ellsif driver) that basically brings in most > of the LLVM stuff: bitcode reading, optimizations, linking, and target > code generation. > > All of a sudden, I'm getting the following when I run: > [~/elsa/ellsif] dev% ./ellsif -v test/ofmt.i test/sieve.i -time-actions > -O5 > <premain>: CommandLine Error: Argument
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 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
2008 Jul 06
2
[LLVMdev] Odd problem with command line options
Jay Foad wrote: >> I'm linking a program (my ellsif driver) that basically brings in most >> of the LLVM stuff: bitcode reading, optimizations, linking, and target >> code generation. >> >> All of a sudden, I'm getting the following when I run: >> [~/elsa/ellsif] dev% ./ellsif -v test/ofmt.i test/sieve.i -time-actions >> -O5 >>
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 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
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 ]
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
2008 Apr 02
2
[LLVMdev] Proposal for GSoC project for clang front end
On Wednesday 19 March 2008 21:27:18 Chris Lattner wrote: > On Wed, 19 Mar 2008, Argiris Kirtzidis wrote: > > I'd like to hear your opinions and ideas for a proposal to improve > > support for C++ parsing for LLVM's clang front end. > > Some meta feedback: C++ support in clang is a huge project, far and away > more than any mortal can get done in a summer. While it
2008 Jan 02
1
[LLVMdev] Inline semantics.
Ellsif compiles and runs bzip2. During testing I noticed that if I set the optimization level to O2 or greater, I'd get an unresolved symbol at link time. It turns out that a function is declared in a header file and is used by two separate source files. In one of the source files, the function is defined with __inline__. If I do function inlining during compilation (i.e. bitcode
2009 Jun 07
2
[LLVMdev] Programmatically setting command line options?
Hello, Is there currently a way to set options, like -time-passes or -regalloc from C++? I looked at the code in lib/Support/CommandLine.cpp, but the stuff that comes closest to providing such functionality (mostly GetOptionInfo()) is marked static. Thanks, Paul
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 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 >
2009 Mar 10
40
dlstat for data link statistics
(Bcc''ed to networking discuss). Hi All, Have enclosed man page draft for dlstat(1M) herewith. This is part of the effort to gain better visibility into network traffic in light of crossbow features like virtual NICs, interrupt vs. polling modes etc. This in turn would greatly assist network performance analysis. It is also aimed at segregating link/flow configuration from
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
2009 Jul 11
2
[LLVMdev] ANTLR?
Right, I understand that. I was hoping there was such an implementation using ANTLR since it looks like a fairly mature project. I'm not sure how stable or mature Elsa is (but comments to clarify that would be appreciated.). E.g., a quick scan of their Web page shows the comment that they only have a partial type checker. It also says their template instantiation is incomplete.
2010 Apr 06
2
[LLVMdev] Undefined symbol when loading pass
Hi, I have written a pass to compute the reaching definitions for variables using loads and stores. The class for this pass is named ReachingDef and the pass itself is registered as reaching-def. The compiled reaching-def.so file goes to llvm-home/Release/lib/. This pass is used by another function pass that is registered as iel and the class is named SIL. I have setup AnalysisUsage object of SIL
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
2009 Jul 11
0
[LLVMdev] ANTLR?
On Jul 11, 2009, at 1:41 PM, Vikram S. Adve wrote: > Right, I understand that. I was hoping there was such an > implementation using ANTLR since it looks like a fairly mature > project. Not that I'm aware of. > I'm not sure how stable or mature Elsa is (but comments to clarify > that would be appreciated.). E.g., a quick scan of their Web page > shows the
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