similar to: [LLVMdev] Another Ubuntu problem:

Hello All Does any know about some opensource multithread-compatible (or concurrent) garbage collector library, if possible suitable for LLVM? (I mean that I want several mutator threads; the collector can be stoptheworld or concurrent ....) H.Boehm's conservative GC is multithread compatible, but seems quite slow (allocation is about the time of a C malloc). And it is well known that

Hello All, On a Debian/AMD64 host I am surprised that there is apparently no way to generate position independent code in shared object (i.e. to output files which are easy dlopen-able without pain)? I probably missed something obvious, but what? I want to compile LLVM assembly source code -suitably generated- into .so as directly as possible... Regards -- Basile STARYNKEVITCH

Hello (my machine is a Debian/Sid/x86-64/Core2) Assuming I have one C source file chello.c, to compile it into a dynamically loadable thru dlopen shared object, I can run gcc -fPIC -shared -O chello.c -o chello.so I thought that, assuming I have one llvm source ehello.ll, the equivalent would be llvmc2 -opt ehello.ll -o ehello.so but it is not that simple. Any clues ? May I also

On Mon, 22 Oct 2007, Basile STARYNKEVITCH wrote: > On a Debian/AMD64 host I am surprised that there is apparently no way to > generate position independent code in shared object (i.e. to output > files which are easy dlopen-able without pain)? > > I probably missed something obvious, but what? You're missing the fact that llvmc is highly experimental, and is not really usable

Basile STARYNKEVITCH wrote: > Does any know about some opensource multithread-compatible (or > concurrent) garbage collector library, if possible suitable for LLVM? > > (I mean that I want several mutator threads; the collector can be > stoptheworld or concurrent ....) > > H.Boehm's conservative GC is multithread compatible, but seems quite > slow (allocation is

The release branch has been created and the llvm-gcc mirror updated (thanks Bill!). I will be doing some preliminary testing before I request the help of the community to test the release. During this time, I ask that developers only commit documentation changes to the release branch and email the list with any bug fixes that need to be merged into the release branch. Bug fixes have to be

Hi Guys, I am really a fresh man on compiler. I want to make a compiler that transform C-like language into assemble form, as the the same as Pixie's or Aqsis's RenderMan Shading Language compiler, just like this, #!version 2.1.1 surface #!parameters: uniform float Ka = 1 uniform float Kd = 1 #!variables: varying vector Nf varying vector temporary_0 varying vector temporary_1 varying

On Tue, Jun 10, 2008 at 11:07 PM, Mahadevan R <mdevan.foobar at gmail.com> wrote: > int sum(int n) > { > return n + sum(n-1); > } > > it generates this: > > define i32 @sum(i32 %n) nounwind { > entry: > %tmp2 = add i32 %n, -1 ; <i32> [#uses=1] > %tmp3 = tail call i32 @sum( i32 %tmp2 ) nounwind ; <i32>

On Mon, 5 Nov 2007, Vikram S. Adve wrote: > -- It would be helpful to add some navigation links at the top and bottom of > the pages. I added a TOC to each chapter, thanks. > -- Not clear why PrototypeAST::Codegen returns a Function* instead of a > Value* like the other CodeGen methods? I clarified this in the text. The short version is that PrototypeAST doesn't correspond

Hi, While playing around on the LLVM, I tried this code: int sum(int n) { if (n == 0) return 0; else return n + sum(n-1); } and this is what "llvm-gcc -O2" gave me: define i32 @sum(i32 %n) nounwind { entry: %tmp215 = icmp eq i32 %n, 0 ; <i1> [#uses=1] br i1 %tmp215, label %bb10, label %tailrecurse.bb10_crit_edge tailrecurse.bb10_crit_edge: ; preds =

Le Tue, May 08, 2007 at 10:17:41PM -0700, Tanya M. Lattner écrivait/wrote: > > Here is the schedule: > > May 7th - Release branch created. Developers should begin reviewing > all documentation. > > May 14th - Tar balls and binaries are released for general testing. I'll > also need volunteers to create additional llvm-gcc binaries that I have > not provided.

Thank you for this reply. If so, is there any way to merge basic blocks into a single one? Thanks, Seung J. Lee ---- Original message ---- >Date: Fri, 29 Jun 2007 22:27:38 +0200 >From: Basile STARYNKEVITCH <basile at starynkevitch.net> >Subject: Re: [LLVMdev] LLVM assembly without basic block >To: LLVM Developers Mailing List <llvmdev at cs.uiuc.edu> > >Seung

Hello, with the latest LLVM (almost 2.0 CVS) what is the right way to read a module from a byte array fetched from a database? I thought that I could subclass llbm::module to add my own fields (typically, a MySQL id number) and then parse it as bitcode, but I am stuck, since apparently the only way to parse bitcode is to use a BitcodeReader then calling materializeModule gives a fresh llvm

> I'd like to generate this layout: > > 12(%ebp) - second function parameter > 8(%ebp) - first function parameter > 4(%ebp) - old %EIP (the function's "return address") > 0(%ebp) - old %EBP (previous function's base pointer) > -4(%ebp) - My language specific information > -8(%ebp) - first local variable > -12(%ebp) -

Hello All, What version of g++ is usable to compile the latest LLVM CVS snapshot on a Linux/x86-64 (AMD64) Debian/ Sid or Etch plateform? What compiler do LLVM dzevelopers use to compile LLVM on Linux/X86-64 systems? IKt seems that most versions of g++ fail to compile LLVM and that some others compile it wrongly (producing buggy code)? Why can't g++-4.1 be used? FWIW, the latest gcc

Le Thu, May 03, 2007 at 09:36:22AM -0700, Chris Lattner écrivait/wrote: > On Thu, 3 May 2007, Basile STARYNKEVITCH wrote: > > > > > FWIW, the latest gcc snapshot from yesterday gcc version 4.3.0 20070501 > > (experimental) fail to compile latest LLVM (with compile errors!). > > Please file an llvm bug report with these errors. It may be that we are > doing

On Sat, 12 May 2007, Basile STARYNKEVITCH wrote: > with the latest LLVM (almost 2.0 CVS) what is the right way to read a module > from a byte array fetched from a database? The bitcode reader will read from any MemoryBuffer object. There are a variety of static methods on MemoryBuffer to create them from files, stdio, and memory. If your buffer is in memory, just create a memorybuffer

Hello, guys. I just wonder if there is any way to spit out LLVM assembly without any basic block division. E.g., If I emit LLVM assembly for the following simple code: ------------------------------------------------------------ void f_loop(long* c, long sz) { long i; for (i = 0; i < sz; i++) { long offset = i * sz; long* out = c + offset; out[i] = 0; } }

Thank you for reminding me the notion of the basic block. Of course, I know all the assembly takes the form of BBs and is divided into units of BB. OK. It looks better for me to explain what I wanted to do more clear from the first. Actually, I am working on emitting out an assembly of VM by using LLVM. LLVM assembly looks similar with this VM assembly except BB. The VM assembly does not have the

On Thu, 3 May 2007, Basile STARYNKEVITCH wrote: > > What version of g++ is usable to compile the latest LLVM CVS snapshot on a > Linux/x86-64 (AMD64) Debian/ Sid or Etch plateform? Please look here: http://llvm.org/docs/GettingStarted.html#brokengcc I'd suggest late versions of GCC 4.0.x. The 4.1 series has had numerous problems compiling LLVM on x86-64, though some people have