similar to: [LLVMdev] Returning structs on Linux x86

Hi all, the LLVM documentation lists the 'appending' linkage for having the linker combine two arrays. I'm wondering though if it's then possible to get the size of the combined array, e.g., for iterating over its elements? Or how would I otherwise use the combined array? Thanks, Robin -- Robin Sommer * Phone +1 (510) 666-2886 * robin at icir.org ICSI/LBNL * Fax +1

On Sat, Dec 05, 2009 at 22:56 -0800, I wrote: > the LLVM documentation lists the 'appending' linkage for having the > linker combine two arrays. I'm wondering though if it's then > possible to get the size of the combined array, e.g., for iterating > over its elements? Or how would I otherwise use the combined array? Any thoughts on this? Am I missing something?

On Wed, Sep 25, 2013 at 17:14 +0000, you wrote: > What API did you use in 3.2? llvm::Linker used to have a method LinkInLibrary(). My understanding is that there's a larger reorganisation of the linking process going on but I haven't found a straight-forward replacement for that method yet. I might be missing something though. Or perhaps I could even just reuse some code from that old

Hi all, is there a way to link a native static library (.a) into code that runs through MCJIT? I was able to do it with LLVM 3.2, but it seems the API has changed and maybe was removed? Thanks, Robin -- Robin Sommer * Phone +1 (510) 722-6541 * robin at icir.org ICSI/LBNL * Fax +1 (510) 666-2956 * www.icir.org/robin

Any suggestions? It's not a problem for me, I'm mostly curious as it makes it harder to read the IR. Feel free to point me to other documentation if I'm missing something. Thanks, Robin On Wed, Jul 27, 2016 at 08:10 -0700, I wrote: > The language reference says: "identified [structure] types are never > uniqued". But llvm-link seems to do just that at link-time: >

OK, so in the old implementation you linked a module against the archive before passing it to MCJIT? I'm not familiar with the llvm::Linker interface, so I hope someone else will jump in an address that. I can think of a way to solve this inside MCJIT, but it is almost certainly not what you'd want. -Andy -----Original Message----- From: Robin Sommer [mailto:robin at icir.org] Sent:

I don't believe the changes have made it in yet. In addition to the previous patch set, we've got an independent implementation we've been using for a while: https://github.com/AzulSystems/llvm-late-safepoint-placement We really should get one or the other merged in tree. Could you point me to the previous patch set so I can ping it and review? Philip -------- Original Message

The language reference says: "identified [structure] types are never uniqued". But llvm-link seems to do just that at link-time: > cat x.ll %A = type {} %B = type {} %C = type { %A*, %B* } define void @foo(%C* %c) { ret void } > llvm-link x.ll | llvm-dis ; ModuleID = '<stdin>' source_filename = "llvm-link"

What API did you use in 3.2? I've never tried this, but I think it's probably possible. -Andy -----Original Message----- From: llvmdev-bounces at cs.uiuc.edu [mailto:llvmdev-bounces at cs.uiuc.edu] On Behalf Of Robin Sommer Sent: Tuesday, September 24, 2013 9:37 PM To: llvmdev at cs.uiuc.edu Subject: [LLVMdev] Linking static archives with MCJIT? Hi all, is there a way to link a native

On Wed, Sep 25, 2013 at 19:23 +0000, you wrote: > OK, so in the old implementation you linked a module against the > archive before passing it to MCJIT? Yes, I used a Linker instance to link together a number of my own modules and a static library, and then get a single new LLVM module out of that to hand over to MCJIT. > I can think of a way to solve this inside MCJIT, but it is

Sorry for the spam, but we're looking for a postdoc with compiler expertise, and in particular LLVM, for ICSI's networking group. I thought this list might have somebody interested in such a position: http://www.icsi.berkeley.edu/about/netjob.html Feel free to forward further. Thanks, Robin -- Robin Sommer * Phone +1 (510) 722-6541 * robin at icsi.berkeley.edu ICSI/LBNL *

It seems that llvm-ld is stripping debugging symbols even with optimizations disabled: > cat main.c int main() { int a = 42; return a; } > clang -c -g -emit-llvm -o main.bc main.c > llvm-ld -disable-opt -b=a.out.bc main.bc > clang -g a.out.bc -o a.out >gdb a.out [...] (gdb) break main Breakpoint 1 at 0x40045b:

With 3.9, llvm-link tells me 'invalid subroutine type ref' when linking the two code pieces below, and I don't quite understand why. It looks like it merges the debug information with the custom metadata. I've filed a ticket already [1] but as I'm not sure if this is indeed a bug or if I'm misunderstanding something, I thought I'd ask here. Any ideas? Thanks, Robin

> On 2016-Jul-26, at 02:22, Mehdi Amini <mehdi.amini at apple.com> wrote: > > +CC Duncan``` > >> On Jul 25, 2016, at 8:53 PM, Robin Sommer via llvm-dev <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: >> >> >> With 3.9, llvm-link tells me 'invalid subroutine type ref' when >> linking the two code pieces below, and I don't quite understand

I need to do some analysis, in which I have to selectively convert IFs. I am trying to find a way to call this optimization pass from the JIT code, thus I can decide which branches to convert and which to keep. Apparently I cannot do this using a pass manager. -- View this message in context: http://llvm.1065342.n5.nabble.com/Machine-level-IfConversion-for-ARM-tp69513p69622.html Sent from the

On Thu, Dec 10, 2009 at 12:26 AM, Robin Sommer <robinsommer at web.de> wrote: > > On Sat, Dec 05, 2009 at 22:56 -0800, I wrote: > >> the LLVM documentation lists the 'appending' linkage for having the >> linker combine two arrays. I'm wondering though if it's then >> possible to get the size of the combined array, e.g., for iterating >> over

On Thu, Dec 10, 2009 at 2:05 AM, Eli Friedman <eli.friedman at gmail.com> wrote: > On Thu, Dec 10, 2009 at 12:26 AM, Robin Sommer <robinsommer at web.de> wrote: >> >> On Sat, Dec 05, 2009 at 22:56 -0800, I wrote: >> >>> the LLVM documentation lists the 'appending' linkage for having the >>> linker combine two arrays. I'm wondering

Hi, PS: It is a generic question related to partial loop unrolling, and nothing specific to LLVM. As far as partial loop unrolling is concerned, I could see following three different possibilities. Assume that unroll factor is 3. Original loop: for (i = 0; i < 10; i++) { do_foo(i); } 1. First possibility i = 0; do_foo(i++); do_foo(i++);

Hi, I am writing an R package with two functions in C++. So far everything works. Now, i would like to write a third function which would use a pointer (it is a pointer to a class object) created by first function. I tried placing this pointer outside of the function definitions (i.e to make it global) but when called in the 3rd function i get > *** caught bus error *** address 0x0,

Hi, I am writing an R package with two functions in C++. So far everything works. Now, i would like to write a third function which would use a pointer (it is a pointer to a class object) created by first function. I tried placing this pointer outside of the function definitions (i.e to make it global) but when called in the 3rd function i get > *** caught bus error *** address 0x0,