similar to: [LLVMdev] llvm.org down

Hi all, I'm having some trouble building llvm-gcc as of today, with and without bootstrap. The error I get is: /home/kooijman/src/llvm-gcc/obj/./gcc/xgcc -B/home/kooijman/src/llvm-gcc/obj/./gcc/ -B/home/kooijman/src/llvm-gcc/obj/../install/i686-pc-linux-gnu/bin/ -B/home/kooijman/src/llvm-gcc/obj/../install/i686-pc-linux-gnu/lib/ -isystem

Hi all, about a month ago, I've started working on my master's thesis. Since I want to focus on just that work, I've stopped my LLVM work for now. It is unclear whether I will continue my work after graduation, but it seems unlikely. I'll still keep track of LLVM from a personal interest (mostly watching the IRC channel), but I won't have the time to track any mailing lists.

Hi All, I've been fiddling around with a DenseMap to store cached copies of some result. In short, I'm doing the following: It = Map.find(Key) if (It != Map.end() && It->second != Unknown) Return It->second; // do_stuff return Map[Key] = Result; However, I this requires two lookups in the hash table, which is not so nice. Currently, there is no way to write this down so

Hi, I was evaluating all transformation passes and noticed a few things. In particular, I found three passes in the documentation that I can't seem to find any code for. Where these removed? Lower GC intrinsics, for GCless code generators (-lowergc) Correlated Expression Elimination (-cee) Lower select instructions to branches (-lowerselect) Additionally, I found the following passes for

That sounds like a problem. Just so I understand, do you mean there isn't the run-time support etc. to write back ends for the C++ language, or that the compiler IR is also somehow insufficient to write a code generator? --Vikram Associate Professor, Computer Science University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign http://llvm.org/~vadve On Jul 11, 2009, at 3:00 PM, Granville Barnett

Op 9/27/2017 om 2:36 PM schreef Matthijs Kooijman: > Hey folks, > > apologies for the useless subject on my original mail, forgot to update > it. > > Two more bits of info. Here's the log output related to this crash: > > dovecot: imap-login: Login: user=<2014>, method=PLAIN, rip=217.122.126.195, lip=10.42.0.13, mpid=10569, TLS, session=<IsP37ypaFYHZen7D>

https://bugzilla.mindrot.org/show_bug.cgi?id=2621 Bug ID: 2621 Summary: ControlMaster started by scp (non-ssh?) doesn't forward agent Product: Portable OpenSSH Version: 7.3p1 Hardware: All OS: All Status: NEW Severity: normal Priority: P5 Component: Miscellaneous

On Jul 16, 2008, at 9:58 AM, Matthijs Kooijman wrote: > Hi all, > > once more with the patch inline for easy review. I did not include the > argpromotion pass here, since it's not the main topic of this post. Hi Matthijs, I'd prefer to not turn this into a template. Why not just define a version that takes an array of uint64_t's or something like that? -Chris

Hi Dan, please find an updated patch attached (don't forget to run the svn cp command I posted earlier, before applying this patch). I've incorporated all the changes we've discussed. Gr. Matthijs -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 189 bytes Desc: Digital signature URL:

> I suppose to be annoyingly pedantic about it you could require a > network connection for the build, check svn info and svn status and > then set the version string based on whether or not there are local > patches applied to the checkout - but that would probably fall under > neurotic :) Using svnversion (as the original patch does) does exactly this. It outputs the rev

# HG changeset patch # User matthijs at stdin.nl # Date 1240845142 -7200 # Branch HEAD # Node ID 19f4b6167b426c36b7b3b38db4397f2723dc75c2 # Parent c8de2237478fc01ee46e6ec8cda41e8d3cecb68c Clarify rawlog example. diff -r c8de2237478f -r 19f4b6167b42 dovecot-example.conf --- a/dovecot-example.conf Thu Apr 23 12:01:40 2009 -0400 +++ b/dovecot-example.conf Mon Apr 27 17:12:22 2009 +0200 @@ -543,6

Hi Rich, > I was thinking about my problem and thought that there might be a good > interim solution. I would like not to clutter my front end with stuff > that will go away. How about a pass that runs before code generation > that changes functions returning structs to void functions with the > return pointer first parameter? On this topic, you should look at the

Dear all, Is anyone aware of any implementation of an inter procedural slicing algorithm for LLVM? I am mostly interested in a static algorithm but a dynamic one can be helpful too. Thanks, Silviu Ganceanu Research Student, Ecole Polytechique Federale de Luasanne -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL:

Hi Matthijs, Yes, I've turned off the link-time optimizations (otherwise it just propagates my constant vectors and immediate prints the result). :-) Here's essentially what I try to generate: void add(float z[4], float x[4], float y[4]) { z[0] = x[0] + y[0]; z[1] = x[1] + y[1]; z[2] = x[2] + y[2]; z[3] = x[3] + y[3]; } And here's part of the output from the online

Hi Evan, > I don't think this is right. According to llvm documentation: > > The index types specified for the 'getelementptr' instruction depend on the > pointer type that is being indexed into. Pointer and array types can use a > 32-bit or 64-bit integer type but the value will always be sign extended to > 64-bits. Structure and packed structure types require

Hi Nicolas (at least, I suspect your signing of your mail with "Anton" was not intentional :-p), > I assume that's the same as the online demo's "Show LLVM C++ API code" > option (http://llvm.org/demo/)? I've tried that with a structure containing > four floating-point components but it also appears to add them individually > using extract/insert. Maybe

Hi all, I've been discussing parameter attributes and their impact on first-class struct parameters. Duncan and I came to the conclusion that the only attribute that could be applied to structs currently, is the inreg attribute. However, since there is no support anywhere for that currently (transformation passes and backends?), it might be better to disallow the inreg attribute for struct

Hi Devang, > All supported notes must be documented in LLVM language reference. Does this also mean that undocumented / unsupported notes are invalid? In particular, when I have a custom frontend and backend, using custom notes could be a great way to communicate between those, if the LLVM IR would allow unknown notes. Other than that, this seems like a decent approach. As Andrew pointed out,

llvm does not automatically vectorize your scalar code (as least for now). You have to write gcc generic vector code or use vector builtins. Evan On May 8, 2008, at 1:46 PM, Nicolas Capens wrote: > Hi Matthijs, > > Yes, I've turned off the link-time optimizations (otherwise it just > propagates my constant vectors and immediate prints the result). :-) > > Here's

On Tue, Jul 8, 2008 at 2:28 AM, Matthijs Kooijman <matthijs at stdin.nl> wrote: > Hi all, > > I've been discussing parameter attributes and their impact on first-class > struct parameters. Duncan and I came to the conclusion that the only attribute > that could be applied to structs currently, is the inreg attribute. However, > since there is no support anywhere for