similar to: [LLVMdev] Recommended pattern to use LLVM JIT in a multithreaded application

Hi all, I have some questions on some strange behavior I'm seeing with LLVM JIT in a multithreaded application. If this is the wrong forum for questions like this, I apologize, and please redirect me. The setup of the application is a singleton instance of a static Compiler object, which maintains local copies of an LLVM Module, JIT ExecutionEngine, and FunctionPassManager with registered

Hi, all I can not figure this out, please have a look and help me out. thank you! Note: this is in SPLUS, not R. I have following code *********************************** modfit<-function(yir,yew, ft) { n<-length(yew) yew<-yew[1:(n-1)] yy<-yir-ft xx<-yew-ft n<-length(xx) xx0<-xx[2:n] yy0 <-yy [2:n] xx1<-xx[1:(n-1)] fit <- garch(yy0~xx0 + xx1+var.in.mean,

Hey Andy > One easy pattern to follow is to register the option during pass initialization with all the convenient flags and parameters, but refer to a globally defined option storage that enforces the singleton and provides visibility. As long as pass initialization happens before parseCommandLine, usage should be consistent. > > Strawman: > > cl::optval<bool> MyOption; //

Hi everyone ! If I call ExecutionEngine::createJIT (or EngineBuilder::create) more than one time, the second time fails on a assertion "Multiple JIT resolvers?". It seems that the JIT is designed to be a singleton in the process, and I was wondering if it was something mandatory. How hard will it be to make it a non-singleton object ? Is this a JIT-only problem (work needed on JIT

We try to use llvm to translate and generate the native code in parallel with multi-thread. But some various bugs will be triggered. We run the following code in multithread environment: ################## BasicBlock::Create(_CTX(), "dispatch", cpu->cur_func, 0); BranchInst::Create(bb_start, label_entry); cpu->exec_engine->getPointerToFunction ##################3 And cpu

I have been looking at the possibility of writing a multithreaded server with the LLVM JIT acting as a key part of the runtime system. In this kind of setting it may entirely be possible for the compiler to be active on to separate threads. I am curious in this sort of situation which entities I would have to protect with a mutex. Is it just certain functions in the Module class? Thanks in

On Tue, Feb 3, 2009 at 12:33 PM, aparna kotha <kotha.aparna at gmail.com> wrote: > Hi all: > > I am working on a project using llvm and we need to deal with multithreaded > applications. I wanted to know if there was a C front end for llvm that > could parse multithreaded applications? I tried llvm-gcc (4.2) and could not > get it to work. Is there an extra parameter that I

Hi all, I know it may not have much sense thinking about a Singleton Pattern in an R application which doesn't use any OOP facilities, however I'm curious to know if anybody faced the same issue. I've been googling but using "singleton pattern" as a key word leads to typical OOP languages like Java or C++ among others. So my problem is that I'd like to ensure some very

Hi all: I am working on a project using llvm and we need to deal with multithreaded applications. I wanted to know if there was a C front end for llvm that could parse multithreaded applications? I tried llvm-gcc (4.2) and could not get it to work. Is there an extra parameter that I need to pass or something ? Thanks a lot for your help. Regards -- -- Aparna Graduate Student Department

In eager compilation mode, I don't know of anything that would go wrong with having multiple JITs in the process. However, in lazy compilation mode, we need to map stub addresses to the JIT that knows how to compile them. Right now, that's done by looking up the static "TheJITResolver" variable and assuming it's the only JIT, but we could 1) use a static

Hi Jeffrey, Thanks for pointing me in the right direction ! I'm not using the JIT in lazy mode, but it was fun to understand the lazy-stub code. Attached you will find a patch which follow your 1st option : a map Stub_address -> JITResolver instance, except that the used map is a "std::map" to apply the same upper_bound trick as in the map CallSiteToFunctionMap of the

Hi all how can I implement the singleton patter in RoR? thanks -- Posted via http://www.ruby-forum.com/. --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Ruby on Rails: Talk" group. To post to this group, send email to rubyonrails-talk-/JYPxA39Uh5TLH3MbocFFw@public.gmane.org To unsubscribe from this

Thanks for the patch! I'll clean this up, convert your sample to a unit test, and commit it for 2.7. On Sun, Feb 7, 2010 at 6:09 AM, Olivier Meurant <meurant.olivier at gmail.com> wrote: > Hi Jeffrey, > > Thanks for pointing me in the right direction ! > I'm not using the JIT in lazy mode, but it was fun to understand the > lazy-stub code. > > Attached you will

Thanks Jeffrey ! If possible, keep me inform (on revision number), I'm interested to see how you will do the unit test. (For my future patch... :) ). Thanks again. Olivier. On Wed, Feb 10, 2010 at 6:22 PM, Jeffrey Yasskin <jyasskin at google.com>wrote: > Thanks for the patch! I'll clean this up, convert your sample to a > unit test, and commit it for 2.7. > > On Sun,

Right now, on X86, creating multiple ExecutionEngines in the same process causes an assertion. If it's supposed to always be a singleton, should there be a way to get the process's ExecutionEngine instance? This would, among other things, allow "lli" to execute bitcode that itself uses the ExecutionEngine.

On Oct 8, 2009, at 9:19 AM, Kenneth Uildriks wrote: > Right now, on X86, creating multiple ExecutionEngines in the same > process causes an assertion. > Yes. This is by design. > If it's supposed to always be a singleton, should there be a way to > get the process's ExecutionEngine instance? > I can't see why. You could make a server to process llvm code. >

I was misconstrued as having insulted Minister Mentor Lee Kuan Yew. My words were twisted and misinterpreted and I feel that there is a need to explain myself and set the record straight. [b]What really happened[/b] It was sometime in Aug/Sep in the year 2009. The setting was in the Tampines Central office of Asiasoft Online Pte Ltd. I was having a ***verbal*** conversation with Melvin Lee,

I am using pthreads. I was also wondering what will the llvm IR be for pthreads ? On Tue, Feb 3, 2009 at 3:51 PM, Bill Wendling <isanbard at gmail.com> wrote: > On Tue, Feb 3, 2009 at 12:33 PM, aparna kotha <kotha.aparna at gmail.com> > wrote: > > Hi all: > > > > I am working on a project using llvm and we need to deal with > multithreaded > >

On 10/05/2010 09:42 AM, hamed hamzehi wrote: > Hi > yes, I'm asking for any advice, I want to implement multithreaded code > generator in LLVM. > tnx Hi, this generally depends which kind of code you want to multithread, because generally this is a difficult problem. However, if you limit yourself for the moment to loops that fit into the polyhedral model, you can take

Hi, In fact I have some theory on instruction level parallelism( i have a partitioning algorithm), then first of all, i want to generate a multithreaded code from LLVM IR (in assembly level) with a given partitioning. My problem is how can i use a thread library(like Pthread) or OS system calls in LLVM IR to create and manage threads? --- On Tue, 10/5/10, Tobias Grosser <grosser at