similar to: [LLVMdev] lli and runtime error

Hi, I am new to LLVM and was trying out various tool of LLVM. I compiled my source file containing a implementation of matrix-matrix multiplication, using llvm-g++ -emit-llvm -O3 -c dgemm.cpp -o dgemm.bc and tried running the source file on the llvm interpreter using lli --force-interpreter=true dgemm.bc I get the error Could not resolve external global address: __dso_handle followed by

Jello Juan, The interpreter is quite useless in its current state. Try using a JIT compiler for you computer from the lli command and it should work. --Sam > >From: Juan Carlos Martinez Santos <juanc.martinez.santos at gmail.com> >To: LLVM Developers Mailing List <llvmdev at cs.uiuc.edu> >Sent: Thursday, June 25, 2009 1:04:17 PM >Subject: [LLVMdev] Problems with lli

Hello, I just install the new newest version of LLVM. When I ran the hello.c example I got the below message. Somebody has an idea what is wrong? The problem is just with lli, the other commands worked as I expected. ********************** :~/LLVM/my-test$ lli hello.bc Tried to execute an unknown external function: i32 (i8*)* puts 0 lli 0x0861fab8 Stack dump: 0. Program arguments: lli

Hello Matt, The interpreter doesn't support external functions at all. This includes the printf function from the glibc library. That's why the signal causes a segfault. If you're interested in bringing the interpreter up-to-date with the JIT compiler, I would welcome it since JIT compilation isn't supported on all platforms. --Sam ----- Original Message ---- > From:

Forgot to CC the list. ----- Forwarded Message ---- > From: Samuel Crow <samuraileumas at yahoo.com> > To: Trevor Elliott <trevor at galois.com> > Sent: Fri, January 14, 2011 7:33:15 PM > Subject: Re: [LLVMdev] LLVM GC > > Hi Trevor, > > Are you linking with LibStdC++ or LibC++? That is a requirement for running > code that has been compiled from C++

Just a quick question on LLVM, signals, and the lli interpreter. A sample program is included at the end. Platform is x86, Linux, 32-bit, GCC 4.2.4. Does lli -force-interpreter support signals, or is it only the JIT that does? The following sample program crashes with lli 2.5 and lli top-of-tree. Thanks and regards, Matt ============================= #include <stdio.h> #include

On Thu, Nov 19, 2009 at 12:45 PM, Samuel Crow <samuraileumas at yahoo.com> wrote: > > > > > ----- Original Message ---- >> From: Kenneth Uildriks <kennethuil at gmail.com> >> To: Samuel Crow <samuraileumas at yahoo.com> >> Cc: OvermindDL1 <overminddl1 at gmail.com>; LLVM Developers Mailing List <llvmdev at cs.uiuc.edu> >> Sent:

Hi Sam, I've not actually gotten to the linking process with my runtime, as I've compiled it with clang -emit-llvm -c, and then archived it with llvm-ar and llvm-ranlib. I'm also not producing a GC plugin, as I'm using the builtin "shadow-stack" strategy. My current build process looks like this: 1. build the compiler 2. build the runtime using clang -emit-llvm -c

> I agree with you OvermindDL1, > > SInce the language I'm going to be working on doesn't support varargs, it would be nice to be able to ditch the C calling convention for fastcc in all occurrances for an added speed boost.  I also will need to add my own library calling convention on one platform I plan on supporting which will be register-loaded as well. Are you going to be

Hi Nate, I've successfully ported one bitcode from Linux to Mac to Windows.  All were x86 and the program was text-based, but I'd say my LLVM Wrapper would be worth some effort in the future if I could just get some help.  Currently it just wraps StdIO.h with its own functions. Here's some of what it would take to make portable bitcodes in C or LLVM Assembly: * Convert all

Hi Nick, > Fundamentally the issue is that the system linker is supposed to define > __dso_handle when linking, but since there is no system linker between > your build of the .bc files and running lli, nobody has defined it. > > It seems reasonable to me that lli should define __dso_handle if it's > declared in the module. > > You could module tools/lli/lli.cpp to add

Ashok Nalkund wrote: > > Resending :(. Any pointers? Fundamentally the issue is that the system linker is supposed to define __dso_handle when linking, but since there is no system linker between your build of the .bc files and running lli, nobody has defined it. It seems reasonable to me that lli should define __dso_handle if it's declared in the module. You could module

Hi, I've been implementing a compiler that targets LLVM, and was looking into using the shadow-stack gc strategy. Currently, I build the runtime with clang (using -emit-llvm), and then link that with the LLVM bitcode output from my compiler using llvm-ld. This works fine without the gc strategy annotations and use of the llvm.gcroot intrinsic, but adding them causes some odd behavior: the

----- Original Message ---- > From: Óscar Fuentes <ofv at wanadoo.es> > To: Samuel Crow <samuraileumas at yahoo.com> > Cc: Óscar Fuentes <ofv at wanadoo.es>; LLVM Developers Mailing List ><llvmdev at cs.uiuc.edu> > Sent: Fri, January 14, 2011 4:39:57 PM > Subject: Re: Circular Deps from CMake build using makefile > > Samuel Crow <samuraileumas

----- Original Message ---- > From: Kenneth Uildriks <kennethuil at gmail.com> > To: Samuel Crow <samuraileumas at yahoo.com> > Cc: OvermindDL1 <overminddl1 at gmail.com>; LLVM Developers Mailing List <llvmdev at cs.uiuc.edu> > Sent: Thu, November 19, 2009 12:22:55 PM > Subject: Re: [LLVMdev] fastcc and ExecutionEngine::getPointerToFunction() > > >

After waiting through about 2 hours of hard drive spinning for Clang to link under my Xubuntu Lucid Lynx Linux setup on VirtualBox, ld finally just gave up trying to link it. I was using CMake's build scripts on version 2.7 release of LLVM and Clang. The version of ld is (GNU Binutils for Ubuntu) 2.20.1-system.20100303. Can anyone confirm this problem? If needed I'll cross-post this to

Hello Óscar, This time the autotools version of LLVM trunk build with Clang trunk compiled in Debug+Asserts mode without complaint with --enable-bindings=none. I suspect this makes something fishy looking with the CMake build. Do you need logfiles from configure? Thanks again, --Sam ----- Original Message ---- > From: Óscar Fuentes <ofv at wanadoo.es> > To: Samuel Crow

Sam, Nick, thank you both for your reply--that was what I thought but wanted to check. The JIT compiler for x86 is pretty robust. Are you aware of any comprehensive list of the most "significant" functional differences between the interpreter and the JIT for x86, i.e. a TODO list? grep -I todo * ? I've just got a rather large project here (user-mode Linux) which works with the

----- Original Message ---- > From: Eli Friedman <eli.friedman at gmail.com> > To: Samuel Crow <samuraileumas at yahoo.com> > Cc: LLVM Developers Mailing List <llvmdev at cs.uiuc.edu> > Sent: Monday, August 31, 2009 3:49:01 PM > Subject: Re: [LLVMdev] accessing a bitcode library exported from C++ using the JIT > > On Mon, Aug 31, 2009 at 12:17 PM, Samuel

Samuel Crow <samuraileumas at yahoo.com> writes: > This time the autotools version of LLVM trunk build with Clang trunk compiled in > Debug+Asserts mode without complaint with --enable-bindings=none. I suspect > this makes something fishy looking with the CMake build. Do you need logfiles > from configure? I'm clueless about what's happening there. The cyclic