similar to: [LLVMdev] Fwd: Basic questions

> I'd like to support users dynamically adding and using functions > (plus structs, globals etc) to a Module, JIT compiling to an > ExecutionEngine, in an interleaved fashion. That is, declare & define > a function, run it through a FunctionPassManager, add it to an > ExecutionEngine, use it, go ahead and repeat for a different function > with the same Module,

Hi, The JIT engine currently uses a single memory block for all functions that you JIT-compile (and global variables, constants, etc..). Still, you can easily create and delete machine code. You can use the following functions: engine->freeMachineCodeForFunction(function); // clean the JITed code function->eraseFromParent(); // clean a function's IR About the lifetime of the classes,

Hi, I apologize in advance if this is not the correct place to ask these questions, but I would be very grateful for redirection to the appropriate list/docs if so. I've just started with LLVM in the last week or so, and have worked my way through the Kaleidoscope tutorial, the IR docs & programmers manual, plus a few of the examples; everything makes sense. But there's one

Hello, I'm using Mono with experimental LLVM backend support on PowerPC. I noticed that although LLVM's IR contains SIMD instructions the assembly produced doesn't contain any Altivec instructions and my PowerPC970 machine of course has Altivec support. Isn't there some kind of autodetection? I searched in Target sources but only found out that Altivec is disabled by default. Can

On 08/27/2010 11:05, Dale Johannesen wrote: >>>> Function only has on BB. Is this wrong that it has both >>>> TCRETURNri64 and RET in one BB? >>> >>> Yes, that is wrong. The reason emitEpilogue isn't lowering the >>> TCRETURN is that it doesn't see it, it only sees the RET. The real >>> problem will be where that RET is

Andrew Haley wrote: > Jeff Kuskin wrote: > > Apologies if this is a FAQ. > > > > I am using the LLVM JIT facility on an x86_64 platform. I generate > > IR for a single function using IRBuilder(), use the > > FunctionPassManager to do some optimization passes, and then call > > ExecutionEngine::getPointerToFunction() to get a native-code version > > of

On 08/27/2010 11:32, Yuri wrote: > As I understand only one of TCRETURNri64 and RET should be created. > I have sources of rev.112200. > > Here is the stack when TCRETURNri64 instruction is created: > #1 0x0000000802c8b4e2 in llvm::MachineFunction::CreateMachineInstr > (this=0x30eb000, TID=@0x803a78940, DL={LineCol = 0, ScopeIdx = 0}, > NoImp=false) at

Hello, I'm using Mono with experimental LLVM backend support on PowerPC. I noticed that although LLVM's IR contains SIMD instructions the assembly produced doesn't contain any Altivec instructions and my PowerPC970 machine of course has Altivec support. Isn't there some kind of autodetection? I searched in Target sources but only found out that Altivec is disabled by default. Can

First, I'm not sure if deleting the ExecutionEngine is all I need to clean-up... so I started with a minimal test just to check int main( int argc, char **argv ){ while( true ){ Module *M = new Module("M"); Function *F = cast<Function>(M->getOrInsertFunction("F", Type::Int32Ty, (Type*)0)); BasicBlock *BB = new

On Sun, 15 Jul 2007, Paolo Invernizzi wrote: > First, I'm not sure if deleting the ExecutionEngine is all I need to > clean-up... so I started with a minimal test just to check Is this llvm 2.0 or llvm svn head? Several minor memory leaks have been fixed since llvm 2.0. -Chris > int main( int argc, char **argv ){ > while( true ){ > Module *M = new

Hi, I'm experimenting with using LLVM to generate dynamic FFI bridges in VisualWorks Smalltalk. LLVM is an amazing thing! I'm going from dynamically generated assembler source to machine code, and I have that all working, copied from the llc tool and the JIT example. I have two questions: 1. What optimization passes, if any, should I run on the module before I pass it to the

Dear Maxime, Nyx wrote: > Hello, > > I would like to know how to go about printing the x86 assembly output for a > compiled function (I'm using the JIT). I saw there is a X86IntelAsmPrinter > on doxygen. However, it takes several arguments I don't know how to fill in. > Is there a helper function to create such a pass? Once I have the pass > created, do I just add it

Apologies if this is a FAQ. I am using the LLVM JIT facility on an x86_64 platform. I generate IR for a single function using IRBuilder(), use the FunctionPassManager to do some optimization passes, and then call ExecutionEngine::getPointerToFunction() to get a native-code version of the function. Everything works fine so far. Two questions: Question (1): How can I get the size of the native

Hi Everyone, When I compile a program with clang with debug symbols enabled and I try to run it using the JIT (lli) I get the following error message. I am running on Lion (10.7.4). Thanks. George >> pseudo instructions should be removed before code emission UNREACHABLE executed at /Users/JD/Software/llvm3.1/llvm-3.1.src/lib/Target/X86/X86CodeEmitter.cpp:736! 0 lli

If you add an ASM node, you won't be able to JIT the result. I don't know if you care about that or not, but ASM nodes aren't supported by the execution engine. (If you do want to JIT, you could always dump the machine code to memory and link its location to a global using ExecutionEngine::addGlobalMapping), and then JIT whatever needs to call it. Obviously, it won't get inlined

I'm trying to set up some automated testing, and I'd like to have multiple instances of ExecutionEngines, so that the state from the first test doesn't alter the second state. Right now I'm doing something along the lines of: Module *emptyModule = new Module("emptyModule"); ExecutionEngine executionEngine = ExecutionEngine::create(emptyModule);

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

Hello, I would like to know how to go about printing the x86 assembly output for a compiled function (I'm using the JIT). I saw there is a X86IntelAsmPrinter on doxygen. However, it takes several arguments I don't know how to fill in. Is there a helper function to create such a pass? Once I have the pass created, do I just add it to a FunctionPassManager? Thank you for your time, -

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

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