similar to: [LLVMdev] Change in JIT

Hi, Why are there so many undocumented (and as I far I can see) unnecessary API changes? Recently there has been: 1. For JIT applications, please include llvm/Target/TargetSelect.h and call the llvm::InitializeNativeTarget() function before creating an EE. 2. The major CHANGE is: the JIT will no longer be safe for executing threaded applications without first invoking

On Jun 17, 2009, at 12:06 PM, Mark Shannon wrote: > Why are there so many undocumented (and as I far I can see) > unnecessary > API changes? They are only seem unnecessary if you don't understand the reason they were made. We don't make change for change's sake :) > Recently there has been: > > 1. > For JIT applications, please include

Well, I've been before hours trying this, but soon after I sent the email I found something. However is quite intriguing. I just changed the order of and the static libraries that I was linking. How can this be possible?? I'm using Cmake for building my llvm projects, so I choose the order and I pick the .a libraries I want to link by hand... Thank you, alvaro 2009/3/8 Álvaro

Hi, Long time ago (llvm-svn june 2008) I asked here about a way to output the assembly code of my JIT generated code to a string, so I could use it to read it on the screen. I came up with this solution: std::string Err; const llvm::TargetMachineRegistry::entry* _arch = llvm::TargetMachineRegistry::getClosestTargetForJIT(Err); std::string FeaturesStr; llvm::TargetMachine*

On Tue, Jul 20, 2010 at 3:41 PM, Olivier Meurant <meurant.olivier at gmail.com> wrote: > New patch taking Eli's comments into account. Comments inline. If you have commit access, I'd fire away. If not, I can. diff --git include/llvm/MC/MCAssembler.h include/llvm/MC/MCAssembler.h index 07ca070..afff96e 100644 --- include/llvm/MC/MCAssembler.h +++ include/llvm/MC/MCAssembler.h

Hi, I'm embarrassed that I can't figure this out... I have a compiler that outputs my module in either .s assembly format or .obj binary format, either one works just fine. But if I try to output both of them by adding passes, LLVM throws an Assert: void WinCOFFStreamer::EmitLabel(MCSymbol *Symbol) { assert(Symbol->isUndefined() && "Cannot define a symbol

When you say 'static libraries' do you mean static libraries or shared objects (.so)... Because if you mean shared objects, then it could very well explain you crash. On Mar 9, 12:16 am, Álvaro Castro Castilla <alvaro.castro.casti... at gmail.com> wrote: > Well, I've been before hours trying this, but soon after I sent the > email I found something. However is quite

New patch. Thanks for all of your comments ! > Comments inline. If you have commit access, I'd fire away. If not, I can. I don't have commit access, if you find it ok, please commit it. :) Olivier. On Wed, Jul 21, 2010 at 6:56 AM, Reid Kleckner <reid.kleckner at gmail.com> wrote: > On Tue, Jul 20, 2010 at 3:41 PM, Olivier Meurant > <meurant.olivier at gmail.com>

On Jun 17, 2009, at 9:46 AM, Paul Melis wrote: > FWIW, I'm also suddenly experiencing segfaults in code that used to > work > a few days ago (I'm using svn). This may be unrelated to the problem > described below, but perhaps it's the same thing. > > In my case it seems that creating an ExecutionEngine has changed. I > used > to do > > Module* Mod

Chris Lattner wrote: >> The TargetMachine class has a method 'addPassesToEmitMachineCode', that's >> suitable for that, but that method also requires an instance of >> MachineCodeEmitter. > > Actually, you probably want to plug into the addPassesToEmitFile API, when > FileType is set to ObjectFile. X86TargetMachine::addPassesToEmitFile > demonstrates

On Mon, 27 Feb 2006, Vladimir Prus wrote: > I'm looking for a way to make the the "llc" tool (or any other tool), > directly produce a binary file for some target. ok > The TargetMachine class has a method 'addPassesToEmitMachineCode', that's > suitable for that, but that method also requires an instance of > MachineCodeEmitter. Actually, you probably

Assuming you are talking about this line: passmanager.add(tliwp); I don't see anything obviously wrong. Are you hitting an assertion or a pure crash? (if LLVM not built with assertions, please rebuild). What does your debugger gives you as a stracktrace? -- Mehdi > On Mar 23, 2016, at 3:44 PM, Lorenzo Laneve via llvm-dev <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: > > Sorry in

Sorry in advance for the stupid question, i still don’t understand some concepts like passes. I took a piece of code from llc, and I used it to write a function that creates an object (or assembly) file from an IR module. It compiles without any problems. But program crashes when it reaches add() method of the pass manager. Can you help me figuring out what’s the problem please? here is my

> On Mar 23, 2016, at 5:41 PM, Lorenzo Laneve <lore97drk at icloud.com> wrote: > > The stack trace: > llvm::PMTopLevelManager::addImmutablePass(llvm::ImmutablePass*) > llvm::PMTopLevelManager::schedulePass(llvm::Pass*) > moduleToObjectFile(llvm::Module*,std::string&,llvm::LLVMContext&) Without mapping to line numbers this is not very helpful: moduleToObjectFile

This code path is not likely to crash usually. Did you build LLVM yourself? Which version are you using and can you reduce the test case to be "minimal" so that someone can reproduce? (for instance you don't need a module to create a pass manager) -- Mehdi > On Mar 23, 2016, at 5:50 PM, Lorenzo Laneve <lore97drk at icloud.com> wrote: > > Sorry, that's a pure

The stack trace: llvm::PMTopLevelManager::addImmutablePass(llvm::ImmutablePass*) llvm::PMTopLevelManager::schedulePass(llvm::Pass*) moduleToObjectFile(llvm::Module*,std::string&,llvm::LLVMContext&) Sometimes it doesn't crash because TargetRegistry::lookupTarget() returns an error which says it doesn't support the current target > On Mar 24, 2016, at 1:14 AM, Mehdi Amini

On Feb 24, 2011, at 8:14 AM, David A. Greene wrote: > Chris Lattner <clattner at apple.com> writes: > >>> class CodeGenOpt { >>> ... >>> public >>> getOptLevel() ...; >>> getFPLevel() ...; >>> getMemLevel() ...; >>> }; >>> >>> Does this sound reasonable? >> >> I don't think that this is

Hi, I am working on an LLVM backend for GPUs, and I would like to be able to emit a very simple byte stream of machine code, so that it can be fed directly into the GPU. I don't need anything fancy, just the raw machine code, one instruction after another. I think I've already implemented everything in the backend that is required to do this, but I'm not sure how to get a pointer to

Update: Sorry my bad. I built llvm and tried it with debugging version. It was an assertion (IR/LegacyPassManager.cpp:764) saying that it expects all immutable passes to be initialized. > On Mar 24, 2016, at 2:00 AM, Lorenzo Laneve <lore97drk at icloud.com> wrote: > > I’m using LLVM 3.8.0, and no, it’s the precompiled version > That’s why it doesn’t give me enough info for

Sorry, that's a pure crash I think, assertions are not triggered. Xcode doesn’t map those 2 functions to line numbers because they’re in precompiled libraries On Mar 24, 2016, at 1:44 AM, Mehdi Amini <mehdi.amini at apple.com <mailto:mehdi.amini at apple.com>> wrote: > >> On Mar 23, 2016, at 5:41 PM, Lorenzo Laneve <lore97drk at icloud.com <mailto:lore97drk at