Displaying 20 results from an estimated 20000 matches similar to: "[LLVMdev] Building LLVM 2.5 on CENTOS 5.3"
2009 Apr 28
0
[LLVMdev] Building LLVM 2.5 on CENTOS 5.3
On Apr 28, 2009, at 3:45 PMPDT, Sarah Thompson wrote:
> Hi Folks,
>
> I'm having some difficulties getting LLVM to build and work correctly
> on CENTOS 5.3. This is basically tracked down easily enough to CENTOS
> using GCC 4.1.x by default, which is known-buggy and known not to work
> with LLVM -- I was getting the well-known problem with aborts due to a
> non-empty
2009 Apr 28
2
[LLVMdev] Building LLVM 2.5 on CENTOS 5.3
OK, that got much further, but I'm now seeing another problem which
may (or may not) be related. Building my own code (my model checker),
it builds libraries fine, then within tools (I'm using a fairly
standard LLVM build environment here), I am seeing the error
*** llvm-config doesn't exist - rebuilding it
followed by a
make: Entering an unknown directory
which is
2009 Apr 29
0
[LLVMdev] Building LLVM 2.5 on CENTOS 5.3
Just to give closure here, I eventually gave up, built an Ubuntu 9
VMWare image which uses gcc 4.3.2 by default, installed Eclipse
Ganymede and various other tools, then built LLVM 2.5 and my own code.
It all ran fine. There is clearly something broken in the CentOS gcc43
package. Definitely one to avoid.
[s]
On Apr 28, 2009, at 5:40 PM, Sarah Thompson wrote:
> (My script does both
2009 Apr 29
2
[LLVMdev] Building LLVM 2.5 on CENTOS 5.3
(My script does both of those -- the debug build worked (I think), but
the release build fails)
[s]
On Apr 28, 2009, at 5:19 PM, Bill Wendling wrote:
> We build debug by default. You will have to add ENABLE_OPTIMIZED=1 on
> the "make" command line or --enable-optimized during configuration.
>
> -bw
>
> On Tue, Apr 28, 2009 at 5:12 PM, Sarah Thompson <sarah at
2009 Apr 29
4
[LLVMdev] Building LLVM 2.5 on CENTOS 5.3
Hmm... looks like my LLVM build script only built debug versions of
the tools, not release versions. I'm investigating, I didn't change
anything that should have caused that.
[s]
On Apr 28, 2009, at 4:56 PM, Bill Wendling wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 28, 2009 at 4:43 PM, Sarah Thompson <sarah at findatlantis.com
> > wrote:
>> OK, that got much further, but I'm now
2009 Apr 29
0
[LLVMdev] Building LLVM 2.5 on CENTOS 5.3
We build debug by default. You will have to add ENABLE_OPTIMIZED=1 on
the "make" command line or --enable-optimized during configuration.
-bw
On Tue, Apr 28, 2009 at 5:12 PM, Sarah Thompson <sarah at findatlantis.com> wrote:
> Hmm... looks like my LLVM build script only built debug versions of
> the tools, not release versions. I'm investigating, I didn't change
2009 Apr 28
0
[LLVMdev] Building LLVM 2.5 on CENTOS 5.3
On Tue, Apr 28, 2009 at 4:43 PM, Sarah Thompson <sarah at findatlantis.com> wrote:
> OK, that got much further, but I'm now seeing another problem which
> may (or may not) be related. Building my own code (my model checker),
> it builds libraries fine, then within tools (I'm using a fairly
> standard LLVM build environment here), I am seeing the error
>
> ***
2010 Sep 02
2
[LLVMdev] [REQUEST FOR FEEDBACK] Inline asm multiple alternative constraints
Dale,
Thanks. It's not changed, but I've enclosed a fresh patch against today's
trunk.
However, I'm seeing 28 unexpected failing tests in llvm/test on x86 Linux 64
today. But it's the same on an unmodified tree, so I guess I'm still okay.
It passed at one point for me with these changes.
-John
On Wed, Sep 1, 2010 at 5:04 PM, Dale Johannesen <dalej at apple.com>
2010 Feb 04
2
[LLVMdev] Decoding munged function names
Hi folks,
I'm currently extending my model checker to collect coverage
information, and as part of this I'm finding a need to get a more
friendly version of munged C++ identifiers than the name used by the
linker. For example, though internally, something like '_Z7thread1Pv'
is fine as an identifier, I'd like to be able to give the user
something more readable. Since
2010 Sep 02
0
[LLVMdev] [REQUEST FOR FEEDBACK] Inline asm multiple alternative constraints
Actually the 2.8 fork is coming up tomorrow and I'm thinking maybe we
should wait until after that. Is this something you really want to
get in 2.8?
On Sep 1, 2010, at 6:29 PMPDT, John Thompson wrote:
> Dale,
>
> Thanks. It's not changed, but I've enclosed a fresh patch against
> today's trunk.
> However, I'm seeing 28 unexpected failing tests in
2008 Apr 15
2
A bug in g++ exceptions on 7?
Howdy,
We believe we've found a bug in the libgcc or libstdc++ library (not
sure which one) packaged with the gcc43 port in fbsd7 on an Intel
x86-64. A program linked against those libraries aborts when an
exception is thrown. It does not abort if -lpthread is added to the
link line, even though the program does not use threads. I believe
the problem is related to the pthread stubs in
2010 Sep 21
3
[LLVMdev] inline asm constraints examples/tests
Dale,
Sorry, I see you did say I should run the gcc tests. I apologize for
forgetting this. I'll work on getting them to run here.
Chris et. all,
I have a fix for the assertion failure in the enclosed llvmmultalt8.patch
file. I didn't realize the input constraints could have different numbers
of alternatives from the outputs, which now makes sense. The pr20314-2.c
file now compiles
2010 Sep 01
2
[LLVMdev] [REQUEST FOR FEEDBACK] Inline asm multiple alternative constraints
I'm close to confirming that I get the equivalent results from the
test-suite with my changes, compared to a fresh tree, on a Linux x86 64
bit box.
When that is the case, may I check in my current changes for the LLVM side?
My preference is to develop the mult-alt support incrementally, rather than
one big check-in, as I get nervous sitting on a lot of changes for a long
time.
I feel this
2010 Sep 21
0
[LLVMdev] inline asm constraints examples/tests
On Sep 21, 2010, at 2:45 PMPDT, John Thompson wrote:
> fatal error: error in backend: Ran out of registers during register allocation!
> Please check your inline asm statement for invalid constraints:
> INLINEASM <es:>, 0, 10, %reg16396<def>, 10, %reg16397<def>, 10, %reg16398<def>, 10, %reg16399<def>, 10, %reg16400<def>, 10, %reg16401<def>,10,
2009 Apr 30
2
[LLVMdev] Pulling line number/file/path information from DbgStopPointInst instructions
Hi folks,
I had some code that used to work fine in earlier versions of LLVM,
but is now failing. I have some code that expands DbgStopPointInst
instructions to my own entry points in an opt pass, but it's currently
failing to get the file name and path back, though it is still
correctly getting line numbers. If you happen to have a code fragment
that is known to work, it would be
2010 Sep 02
0
[LLVMdev] [REQUEST FOR FEEDBACK] Inline asm multiple alternative constraints
On Sep 1, 2010, at 11:03 AMPDT, John Thompson wrote:
> I'm close to confirming that I get the equivalent results from the
> test-suite with my changes, compared to a fresh tree, on a Linux x86
> 64 bit box.
>
> When that is the case, may I check in my current changes for the
> LLVM side?
In principle, yes, I'd like to rereview if it's changed.
> My
2010 Aug 30
2
[LLVMdev] [REQUEST FOR FEEDBACK] Inline asm multiple alternative constraints
Dale,
I took a closer look at the first llc failure, initp1. Looking at the
initp1.llc file in gdb, it appears that the statically constructed objects
without the init_priority attribute are being constructed before those with
it, though the test seems to expect the opposite.
The initp1.llc.s file seems to have the .ctors table in the right order, but
the _init code is reading the table in
2010 Sep 21
0
[LLVMdev] inline asm constraints examples/tests
On Sep 20, 2010, at 9:40 PMPDT, John Thompson wrote:
> Thanks, Stuart. Sorry, I had some left-over editing cruft in my email. From Googling runtest, I had found dejagnu, which I'd heard some folks were using over there, so I used the local package manager to install it. But from what you said I went ahead and got the dejagnu sources and built it, but had problems in running make
2009 Apr 30
0
[LLVMdev] Pulling line number/file/path information from DbgStopPointInst instructions
On Wed, Apr 29, 2009 at 6:04 PM, Sarah Thompson <sarah at findatlantis.com> wrote:
> Hi folks,
>
> I had some code that used to work fine in earlier versions of LLVM,
> but is now failing. I have some code that expands DbgStopPointInst
> instructions to my own entry points in an opt pass, but it's currently
> failing to get the file name and path back, though it is
2010 Sep 21
4
[LLVMdev] inline asm constraints examples/tests
Thanks, Stuart. Sorry, I had some left-over editing cruft in my email.
>From Googling runtest, I had found dejagnu, which I'd heard some folks were
using over there, so I used the local package manager to install it. But
from what you said I went ahead and got the dejagnu sources and built it,
but had problems in running make install, which is trying to put it
/usr/local/bin rather than