Displaying 20 results from an estimated 1000 matches similar to: "[LLVMdev] [PATH] Fix instruction size computation on amd64"
2006 Sep 14
1
[LLVMdev] Hello World crashes!
Hi,
Sorry for the newbie question. I downloaded llvm 1.8a and llvm-gcc3.4, tried
out the
simple "Hello, World" program but got the following error. My system is
RedHat 9
$ ./hello
lli: /home//llvm/lib/Target/X86/X86CodeEmitter.cpp:208:
unsigned char ModRMByte(unsigned int, unsigned int, unsigned int):
Assertion `Mod < 4 && RegOpcode < 8 && RM < 8 &&
2006 Jul 14
2
[LLVMdev] Hello World crashes!
Hi,
Sorry for the newbie question. I downloaded llvm and tried out the
simple "Hello, World" program but got the following error. What am I
missing? I am running RHAS 3 Update 4 with GCC 3.2.3.
Thanks,
Bharadwaj
$ ./hello
lli: /home/proj/skokomish/syadaval/ia32/Sandbox/llvm/lib/Target/X86/X86CodeEmitter.cpp:208:
unsigned char ModRMByte(unsigned int, unsigned int, unsigned int):
2009 May 04
3
[LLVMdev] [PATH] Fixes for the amd64 JIT code
Hi,
If this looks ok, could somebody check it in ?
thanks
Zoltan
Evan Cheng-2 wrote:
>
> Looks good. Thanks.
>
> Evan
>
> On May 1, 2009, at 8:40 AM, Zoltan Varga wrote:
>
>> Hi,
>>
>> The attached patch contains the following changes:
>>
>> * X86InstrInfo.cpp: Synchronize a few places with the code
2004 Sep 01
2
[LLVMdev] Problem with CVS LLVM build in obj != src dir case
LLVM build without big problems in obj dir == src dir case (for example,
last night tester build)
But I have problem with building CVS version LLVM in obj dir != src dir
case.
======= Finished building ModuleMaker debug executable (without symbols)
=======
gmake[2]: Leaving directory
`/usr/home/wanderer/pkg/build/llvm/obj/examples/ModuleMaker'
gmake[1]: Leaving directory
2009 May 05
2
[LLVMdev] [PATH] Fixes for the amd64 JIT code
Hi Zoltan,
The part that determines whether SIB byte is needed caused a lot of
regressions last night (see Geryon-X86-64 etc.). I've reverted it for
now. Please take a look.
Thanks,
Evan
On May 4, 2009, at 3:49 PM, Evan Cheng wrote:
> Committed as revision 70929. Thanks.
>
> Evan
>
> On May 3, 2009, at 8:29 PM, vargaz wrote:
>
>>
>> Hi,
>>
>>
2009 May 05
1
[LLVMdev] [PATH] Fixes for the amd64 JIT code
Hi,
It looks like the problem was with the RIP relative addressing. The
original patch mistakenly
removed the || DispForReloc part because I tough that the RIP relative
addressing was done
by the SIB encodings, but it is actually done by the shorter ones.
The attached patch seems to work for me on linux and when simulating darwin
by forcing some variables in X86TargetMachine.cpp to their darwin
2009 May 04
0
[LLVMdev] [PATH] Fixes for the amd64 JIT code
Committed as revision 70929. Thanks.
Evan
On May 3, 2009, at 8:29 PM, vargaz wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> If this looks ok, could somebody check it in ?
>
> thanks
>
> Zoltan
>
>
> Evan Cheng-2 wrote:
>>
>> Looks good. Thanks.
>>
>> Evan
>>
>> On May 1, 2009, at 8:40 AM, Zoltan Varga wrote:
>>
2009 May 05
0
[LLVMdev] [PATH] Fixes for the amd64 JIT code
Hi,
I can't reproduce these failures on my linux machine. The test machine
seems to be
running darwin. I suspect that the problem might be with RIP relative
addressing, or with
the encoding of R12/R13, but the code seems to handle the latter, since it
checks for
ESP/EBP which is the same as R12/R13.
Zoltan
On Tue, May 5, 2009 at 8:18 PM, Evan Cheng <evan.cheng at
2004 Sep 02
0
[LLVMdev] Problem with CVS LLVM build in obj != src dir case
I resend email with updated (after mass header move) log examples.
> LLVM build without big problems in obj dir == src dir case (for example,
> last night tester build)
> But I have problem with building CVS version LLVM in obj dir != src dir
> case.
>
gmake[1]: Entering directory
`/usr/home/wanderer/pkg/build/llvm/obj/projects'
gmake[2]: Entering directory
2009 May 01
2
[LLVMdev] [PATH] Fixes for the amd64 JIT code
Hi,
The attached patch contains the following changes:
* X86InstrInfo.cpp: Synchronize a few places with the code in
X86CodeEmitter.cpp
* X86CodeEmitter.cpp: Avoid the longer SIB encoding on amd64 if it is not
neeed.
Zoltan
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL:
2008 Apr 15
4
[LLVMdev] Being able to know the jitted code-size before emitting
OK, here's a new patch that adds the infrastructure and the
implementation for X86, ARM and PPC of GetInstSize and GetFunctionSize.
Both functions are virtual functions defined in TargetInstrInfo.h.
For X86, I moved some commodity functions from X86CodeEmitter to
X86InstrInfo.
What do you think?
Nicolas
Evan Cheng wrote:
>
> I think both of these belong to TargetInstrInfo. And
2008 Apr 16
0
[LLVMdev] Being able to know the jitted code-size before emitting
Comments below.
On Apr 15, 2008, at 4:24 AM, Nicolas Geoffray wrote:
> OK, here's a new patch that adds the infrastructure and the
> implementation for X86, ARM and PPC of GetInstSize and
> GetFunctionSize. Both functions are virtual functions defined in
> TargetInstrInfo.h.
>
> For X86, I moved some commodity functions from X86CodeEmitter to
> X86InstrInfo.
>
2009 May 01
0
[LLVMdev] [PATH] Fixes for the amd64 JIT code
Looks good. Thanks.
Evan
On May 1, 2009, at 8:40 AM, Zoltan Varga wrote:
> Hi,
>
> The attached patch contains the following changes:
>
> * X86InstrInfo.cpp: Synchronize a few places with the code in
> X86CodeEmitter.cpp
> * X86CodeEmitter.cpp: Avoid the longer SIB encoding on amd64 if it
> is not neeed.
>
> Zoltan
>
2008 Jan 03
2
[LLVMdev] Tailcall optimization in jit stopped working
tailcall optimization stop working in jit (lli) in revision 45527. i
guess this is because the jit is tailjmping to the wrong function
address. the following change would reenable tailcallopt in jit. But
i am pretty sure that this is not the correct fix (since i don't
really understand what is going on :). maybe evan can comment on this?
regards arnold
Index:
2004 Sep 02
1
[LLVMdev] Problem with CVS LLVM build in obj != src dir case
On Thu, 2004-09-02 at 00:04, Vladimir Merzliakov wrote:
> I resend email with updated (after mass header move) log examples.
>
> > LLVM build without big problems in obj dir == src dir case (for example,
> > last night tester build)
> > But I have problem with building CVS version LLVM in obj dir != src dir
> > case.
I *only* build with obj dir != src dir and
2009 Mar 16
0
[LLVMdev] MachO and ELFWriters/MachineCodeEmittersarehard-codedinto LLVMTargetMachine
> I've never looked at the MachO code as I do not have such a platform nor do
> I know the file format.
>
> Could we concentrate on the ELF backend, please.
I don't mind using the ELF backend as our test case, it just seems
that the ELFWriter/ELFCodeEmitter don't even use the
BufferBegin/BufferEnd/CurBufferPtr system exposed by the base
MachineCodeEmitter. There is a big
2009 Mar 16
2
[LLVMdev] MachO and ELFWriters/MachineCodeEmittersarehard-codedinto LLVMTargetMachine
> Aaron, I mailed in the same mail twice (by mistake), you answered both
> copies. Differently!
>
> In any case, I've re-read what exists. I'm dumping what I understand
> here, so that we can discuss in detail. I'm using MachO as the example
> object format, as the ELF code is totally broken and outdated. Lets
> use the following as the basis for our discussion?
2012 May 14
2
[LLVMdev] MCJIT
I was able to get past the error by calling
InitializeNativeTargetAsmParser() in my code. Now I have a failure in
resolving external libraries, so looking into that (recompiled with
--enable-ffi but I now get an error LLVMgold.so not found).
Then I hda to disable the following code in
lib/Target/X86/X86CodeEmitter.cpp:
> case TargetOpcode::INLINEASM:
> // We allow inline
2012 May 14
2
[LLVMdev] MCJIT
On 5/14/2012 9:18 AM, Jim Grosbach wrote:
>
> On May 14, 2012, at 9:07 AM, Ashok Nalkund<ashoknn at qualcomm.com> wrote:
>
>> I was able to get past the error by calling InitializeNativeTargetAsmParser() in my code. Now I have a failure in resolving external libraries, so looking into that (recompiled with --enable-ffi but I now get an error LLVMgold.so not found).
>>
2009 Mar 16
0
[LLVMdev] MachO and ELF Writers/MachineCodeEmittersarehard-codedinto LLVMTargetMachine
Aaron, I mailed in the same mail twice (by mistake), you answered both
copies. Differently!
In any case, I've re-read what exists. I'm dumping what I understand
here, so that we can discuss in detail. I'm using MachO as the example
object format, as the ELF code is totally broken and outdated. Lets
use the following as the basis for our discussion?
There are 3 classes which