similar to: [LLVMdev] ParseAssemblyString change of behaviour

On Dec 23, 2008, at 7:15 AM, Jan Rehders wrote: > Hi, > > when upgrading my compiler from LLVM 2.1 to 2.4 I stumbled upon a > change of behaviour in ParseAssemblyString. For an interactive > toplevel I am generating .ll source and feeding it into > ParseAssemblyString like this: Hi Jan, I don't think that there is any intentional change here. It sounds like a bug.

Hi, this looks very promising. Do you have any plans to add bindings for the use of an ExecutionEngine, especially recompileAndRelinkFunction? I've build an interactive toplevel implemented in OCaml and I have to pull of some stunts to be able to change the definition of a function. (emit a .ll file containing the code, looking up the function and calling removeBody, then reading

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

<cc'ing llvmdev> On Tue, 28 Nov 2006, Eric van Riet Paap wrote: > I'm working on using the LLVM JIT in PyPy and I hop you can give me a few > hint. ok > I have some things working at and try to write C++ code for what I need > from Python. The unittest I am working on at the moment is looks like > this > > --- Python code... > llglobalmul4 =

>> <snip>. >> void add_global_mapping(const char* name, void* address) { >> GlobalVariable var(Type::IntTy, false, >> GlobalVariable::ExternalLinkage, 0, name, gp_module); >> gp_execution_engine->addGlobalMapping(&var, address); >> } > > This is creating a new global variable on the stack, instead of > finding the existing

On Fri, 5 May 2006, Simon Burton wrote: > This leads me to my next question: as I make more and more functions > with the EE, it slows down. I am re-using the Module, ExistingModuleProvider, > and ExecutionEngine, and pumping the parser like so: > M = ParseAssemblyString(AsmString, M); > ISTM that there should be a way of creating multiple modules/EEs but I ran > into trouble

On Fri, 5 May 2006 01:19:08 -0500 (CDT) Chris Lattner <sabre at nondot.org> wrote: > > On Fri, 5 May 2006, Simon Burton wrote: > > This leads me to my next question: as I make more and more functions > > with the EE, it slows down. I am re-using the Module, ExistingModuleProvider, > > and ExecutionEngine, and pumping the parser like so: > > M =

Hi, I test your code and it works!!! but I didn't understand if "create a function" it necessary for my aims. What I tried to do is declare a structured to allow after declaration global or local structured variables. How I can I do? Thanks, Manuele Il 31/01/2013 10:14, Garba,Peter ha scritto: > Hi, > > that's what I'm doing ... > > //Init the struct type

Hi All, I tryed to create a global structured derived declaration in my compiler by: StructType *st = StructType(getGlobalContext(), elements, false); In dump module i didn't find any code needed to declare a new user data type. Is there a instruction to add this class into current module? Cheers, Manuele

On Thu, 4 May 2006 22:27:08 -0700 Evan Cheng <evan.cheng at apple.com> wrote: > > Hi Simon, > > You're probably right. LLVM's instruction selector is recursive so it > can run out of stack space. Select_store used to have enormous stack > frame (thanks to some gcc issues), we had to do all kinds of tricks > to get it under control. I just took a look at

On Fri, 5 May 2006 16:43:13 +1000 Simon Burton <simon at arrowtheory.com> wrote: > > It slows in the construction phase, so one of these calls: > M = ParseAssemblyString(AsmString, M); > verifyModule( *M ) > M->getNamedFunction(name); > EE->getPointerToFunction > > It feels like there is a linear name lookup going on somewhere. it's

Hi, I'm testing how to free memory of a JIT'd function. I thought ExecutionEngine::freeMachineCodeForFunction() and Function::eraseFromParent() would work and did a test with the following sample code. But I found that the memory usage of the process is constantly growing as the while loop goes. Could someone shed light on this please? Here is the code. int main(int argc, char **argv) {

On Wed, 12 Apr 2006 23:02:12 -0500 (CDT) Chris Lattner <sabre at nondot.org> wrote: > > > I'd like to directly create executable code that i can > > stick in memory somewhere and jump into (call). > > Take a look at the llvm/examples directory. There are several small > programs that create LLVM IR on the fly and JIT compile it. I'm trying to take

Hi, I'm building a little JIT that creates functions to do array manipulations, eg. sum all the elements of a double* array. I'm writing this in python, generating llvm assembly intructions and piping that through a call to ParseAssemblyString, ExecutionEngine, etc. It's working OK on integer values, but i'm getting nasty floating point exceptions when i try this on double*

Hello, It is likely that I missing something however I have to ask. We are working on Mull project https://github.com/mull-project which deals with LLVM IR in the first place so it is often that we encounter errors like the following one when we do things like parseAssemblyString(IR, Err, GlobalCtx);`: ``` test: <string>:7237:187: error: invalid field 'variable' !1526 = distinct

Jon, >> . Some interface to LLVM from OCaml >> >> What work has already been done on this and similar ideas? What is >> the >> easiest >> way to interface a front-end written in OCaml with an LLVM backend? I've written a compiler front end for a custom language in OCaml which features compilation and an interactive toplevel. Until now I am

<ccing llvmdev> On Thu, 23 Mar 2006, Eric van Riet Paap wrote: > I am experimenting with the LLVM JIT as a future codegenerator for the PyPy > JIT. The basics are working which I am extremely happy with! Great! > Maybe you could answer a few questions? (I'm away until monday) > > * Is there a way to show the generated code? Yes, pass -print-machineinstrs into the LLVM

Hi, I put the sample code and a brief analysis using Valgrind to GitHub in order to make my problem clear. https://github.com/naosuke/how-to-free-memory-of-JIT-function The Valgrind heap profiler indicates memory leaking but I don't get what is wrong with the way to free memory. If someone could please offer some advice/suggestion on this, I would really appreciate it. Best, Naosuke On

Hi, when I try to generate LLVM-IR which calls back to native C functions the jit compiler generates invalid code on 64-bit linux. The same code works fine on 32-bit linux, 32-bit OS X and 64-bit OS X. A reproduction case is attached to this mail. It is a simple modification of the "How to use jit" example adding a call to a native function. I am currently using EE->addGlobalMapping

2009/1/2 Chris Lattner <clattner at apple.com> > On Jan 2, 2009, at 12:21 PM, Misha Brukman wrote: > Do you have a specific example of a unit test that would need these? I > really think these should stay private. > Let's take lib/Transforms/Utils/CodeExtractor.cpp . The public interface for it is in include/llvm/Transform/Utils/FunctionUtils.h, with only the high-level