similar to: [LLVMdev] Tail calls from OCaml

Here's my translation of the Fibonacci example into OCaml: open Printf open Llvm let build_fib m = let fibf = define_function "fib" (function_type i32_type [| i32_type |]) m in let bb = builder_at_end (entry_block fibf) in let one = const_int i32_type 1 and two = const_int i32_type 2 in let argx = param fibf 0 in set_value_name "AnArg" argx; let

Evan Cheng wrote: > As far as I can tell only PPC and X86 targets are supporting this option. Does anyone actually using it? I'd prefer to just remove it to clean up the implementation if no one has any objections. Don't know whether that is the same, but my Pure compiler sets llvm::PerformTailCallOpt. Pure needs TCO because it doesn't have any built-in looping constructs. In

Hi, where can I read more about this? I assume (hope) the lib provides some kind of OCaml bindings? I could not find any trace of it in the 2.1 release source so I guess it's currently SVN only? greetings, Jan On 2. Okt 2007, at 12:22, Gordon Henriksen wrote: > On 2007-10-02, at 03:19, Gordon Henriksen wrote: > >> On Oct 2, 2007, at 00:17, Bill Wendling wrote: >>

Hi all, As previously mentioned on this list the Haskell compiler GHC has a new LLVM based back-end. The back-end needs a new calling convention to efficiently use LLVM and that is what this patch does, just for X86 at the moment. Breakdown: 1) Need actual calling convention Touches: - include/llvm/CallingConv.h - lib/Target/X86/X86CallingConv.td 2) Handling new calling

Hi all, I've added tail call optimization to x86. This is different from what -tailcallopt does, which forces fastcc function to be tail callable. My changes detect opportunities to do tail call without having to change the ABI. I've looked at the codegen of -tailcallopt and it doesn't look all that good. Running it as a llcbeta option shows it significantly pessimize code in most

For marking a call site as a tail call you have to call void setTailCall(bool isTC = true) on the CallInst. The calling convention of the function needs to be CallingConv::Fast (currently only fastcc calls are optimized) and the call has to be in tail position of course. To enable tail call optimization in an embedded vm i guess you would include llvm/Target/TargetOptions.h and set the static

On 2007-10-02, at 10:46, Jan Rehders wrote: > where can I read more about this? I assume (hope) the lib provides > some kind of OCaml bindings? I could not find any trace of it in > the 2.1 release source so I guess it's currently SVN only? Jan, Here's a trivial example. $ cat metahelloworld.ml (* metahelloworld.ml *) open Llvm open Llvm_bitwriter let _ = let filename

OK, new patch attached. Hopefully in time for 2.7. Chris Lattner wrote: > 1) is the GHC calling conv intended to be target specific? If it is x86 specific, it should get an X86 prefix. If not, it should move up to be #10 after Cold. No its intended to be supported on any platforms that GHC is supported on, which is just x86 and SPARC at the moment. At the moment I've just done X86, will

On Mar 2, 2010, at 5:33 PM, David Terei wrote: > Hi all, > > As previously mentioned on this list the Haskell compiler GHC has a new LLVM based back-end. The back-end needs a new calling convention to efficiently use LLVM and that is what this patch does, just for X86 at the moment. Nice, > The GHC developers would love to get this included in LLVM so that we don't need to

On Nov 25, 2007, at 18:53, Jon Harrop wrote: > So my Fib program is segfaulting and I'm not sure why. I think it > might be because my declaration and use of sprintf is wrong. > > I notice llvm-gcc produces declarations containing "..." like: > > declare int %printf(sbyte*, ...) > > What is the correct way to do this? The type you want is: let sp =

So my Fib program is segfaulting and I'm not sure why. I think it might be because my declaration and use of sprintf is wrong. I notice llvm-gcc produces declarations containing "..." like: declare int %printf(sbyte*, ...) but I'm not sure how to do this so I've used: let sprintf = declare_function "sprintf" (function_type (pointer_type

On 2007-10-02, at 03:19, Gordon Henriksen wrote: > On Oct 2, 2007, at 00:17, Bill Wendling wrote: > >> I get this error duing a "make install": >> >> llvm[3]: Installing Debug /usr/local/lib/ocaml/libllvm.a >> install: /usr/local/lib/ocaml/libllvm.a: Permission denied >> make[3]: *** [install-a] Error 71 >> make[2]: *** [install] Error 1

Hi everyone, vmkit requires to know the size of a jitted method before emitting the method. This allows to allocate the correct size for the method. The attached patch creates this functionality when the flag SizedMemoryCode is on. In order to implement this functionality, i had to virtualize some MachineCodeEmitter functions. Is it OK to commit the patch? Thanks, Nicolas --------------

Jon, On 2007-11-24, at 21:58, Jon Harrop wrote: > I just took another look at the LLVM project and it has come along > in leaps and bounds since I last looked. I've been working through > the (awesome!) tutorial and am now really hyped about the project. Excellent! > I am particularly interested in using LLVM to write compilers for > OCaml-like languages in OCaml-like

Tail calls through function pointers should work.If not please send a testcase. I just added the two examples from the bug (1392) that calls for true tail call support. They work on my machine (-tailcallopt needs to be enabled) ;) That would be commit 56127. regards On Thu, Sep 11, 2008 at 11:21 PM, Evan Cheng <evan.cheng at apple.com> wrote: > Arnold implemented tail call. We

I'm just trying to test HLVM with the latest SVN of LLVM and discovered that llvm::PerformTailCallOpt has disappeared from the code but it is still referred to from LangRef.html. Where did it go? -- Dr Jon Harrop, Flying Frog Consultancy Ltd. http://www.ffconsultancy.com/?e

Hi! I just took another look at the LLVM project and it has come along in leaps and bounds since I last looked. I've been working through the (awesome!) tutorial and am now really hyped about the project. I am particularly interested in using LLVM to write compilers for OCaml-like languages in OCaml-like languages. This requires some core functionality that would be generically useful:

The LLVM 2.6-compatible IR below is derived from the HLVM test suite and is one of the things I've noticed going wrong. However, I just discovered that it works with LLVM 2.6 and with LLVM SVN when run through lli or llc without -tailcallopt but when I use: $ llvm-as -f aout.ll $ llc -tailcallopt -f aout.bc -o aout.s $ gcc -lm aout.s -o aout and the latest LLVM SVN it starts to print

Pending positive confirmation in http://llvm.org/PR2886, I'd recommend that r57974 and r57976 be pulled into the 2.4 release branch and configure regenerated there. Begin forwarded message: > From: Gordon Henriksen <gordonhenriksen at mac.com> > Date: October 22, 2008 08:40:40 EDT > To: llvm-commits at cs.uiuc.edu > Subject: [llvm-commits] [llvm] r57974 -

Hi Evan, Evan Cheng wrote: > 1) How are you computing size of the method being > jitted? I add a new pass with addSimpleCodeEmitter, with the emitter being a SizeEmitter. Since the target calls the emitter with functions such as writeByte, writeWord, etc.... the SizeEmitter class implements these function by incrementing a counter. At the end of the pass, the code size of the