similar to: [LLVMdev] Phi Node Question

>> You need to figure out how to pass -rdynamic to the linker, like I said before. http://llvm.org/docs/tutorial/OCamlLangImpl7.html mentions it, but I don't know enough about the ocaml build process to say whether that'll work. I believe I'm already doing that, properly by passing -ccopt -rdynamic to ocamlopt: ocamlopt -cc g++ -ccopt -rdynamic -linkall $(LIBFILES) -o alpha

I'm coding a JIT compiler for C source in OCaml, using LLVM. I'm pretty much done with the LLVM code generation. The problem is that I can't seem to call C library functions. I was told that all I needed to do to be able to link with libc functions was to declare them in my module and give them external linkage, but this does not seem to work. Please note that this is a JIT compiler. I

That sounds rather cumbersome, is there no simpler way to get the actual size of a struct? John Criswell wrote: > > Nyx wrote: >> Hello, >> >> I would just like to ask if it's possible to explicitly free allocas. >> This >> is because I need to call functions that take structs of different sizes >> as >> input, (possibly inside of loops) and I

I'm in a situation where I have code that works fine if I don't run the instruction combining optimization pass, but breaks when I do. The code in question is meant to allocate space for two structs on the stack using alloca, and then pass pointers to these to a callee function. One struct serves to store the input to the function, the other serves for the callee function to write its

I tried running nm - D | grep "puts" on the binary compiled by the OCaml compiler. It outputs the following: 08161b00 T camlRuntime__rt_fputs_208 08161a20 T camlRuntime__rt_puts_198 U fputs I'm assuming this means that fputs is linked dynamically, and puts is not. I tried modifying my code to use fputs instead of puts instead, but had no success, however, I still get:

On Mon, Jun 29, 2009 at 5:54 AM, Nyx<mcheva at cs.mcgill.ca> wrote: > As you can see, I allocate two structs, one taking 16 bytes (containing two > i64 values), and one taking 12 bytes (containing a pointer and an i64 value, > this is on a 32-bit machine) Are you sure that's right? If the target data specifies that a pointer is 64 bits or that i64 has an alignment of 64 bits,

I am interested in writing a JIT that makes use of on-stack replacement. This essentially means that the JIT must be able to compile new versions of already compiled functions (eg: more optimized versions) and ensure that the code for the new functions is executed. I was wondering if LLVM offers any support for this. Suppose a function f calls a function g, and f is recompiled while g is running,

On Mon, Apr 5, 2010 at 3:27 PM, Nyx <mcheva at cs.mcgill.ca> wrote: > >>> You need to figure out how to pass -rdynamic to the linker, like I > said before. http://llvm.org/docs/tutorial/OCamlLangImpl7.html > mentions it, but I don't know enough about the ocaml build process to > say whether that'll work. > > I believe I'm already doing that, properly by

In C, on Linux, you would have to link your JIT compiler with -rdynamic or -Wl,-export-dynamic (they're synonyms). I'm not sure what the equivalent linker flag is for OCaml. You can see what symbols are available to the JIT with `nm -D`. On Sun, Apr 4, 2010 at 8:41 AM, Nyx <mcheva at cs.mcgill.ca> wrote: > > I'm coding a JIT compiler for C source in OCaml, using LLVM.

In the TargetData class (available from you ExecutionEngine), you have some informations available (such as StructLayout...). On Thu, Jun 18, 2009 at 5:08 PM, Nyx <mcheva at cs.mcgill.ca> wrote: > > That sounds rather cumbersome, is there no simpler way to get the actual > size > of a struct? > > > John Criswell wrote: > > > > Nyx wrote: > >>

But, which optimization pass will take advantage of those flags? As for nounwind, that means "can't throw an exception"? - Maxime John McCall-2 wrote: > > Nyx wrote: >> Hello, >> >> I'm in a situation where my code is calling many native functions. >> Sometimes, these calls are simply calls to static "accessor" methods that >>

Hello, For a course project, I am required to write a compiler for some language of my choice, and this compiler has to be implemented in a functional language. I have chosen create a *JIT* compiler for C source, and to implement my compiler in OCaml using LLVM for the back-end. I have experience using LLVM in C++ (I wrote a MATLAB JIT compiler not long ago), however, I am a bit puzzled as to how

Hello, I would like to know if there is an instruction to convert values from the Int1 type to the Double type in LLVM. I would like to achieve the equivalent of casting a bool value to a double value in C++. Doing the simple CreateSIToFP or CreateUIToFP does not work, it throws an assertion ("invalid cast"). I simply want to avoid branching it's not necessary. What's the

I have most of the code working but I'm running into two issues: 1. I'm not sure exactly how to return a structure on the stack. Right now, I'm allocating one with alloca, but it seems I can only return a pointer to it, not the structure itself. Is there any way to dereference the pointer? 2. On the calling side, I get a structure as a return value. However, it seems GEP is

Sorry for the high number of questions I've been posting lately! I'm currently facing a design problem. I'm making a JIT for a subset of the MATLAB language and in that language, functions can return many parameters. The issue is that they will not necessarily return *all* the parameters they could return. The actual number of returned parameters is defined at run-time. For speed, I

On 9 Nov 2013, at 16:35, William Moses <moses.williamsteven at gmail.com> wrote: > Is it possible to create something which has the same effect of a variable-length phi node in the C++ api. Specifically, create a phi-node where the number of incoming values is not known at the time of its creation. The PHI node preallocates its storage, so no. > If there is no such way of creating a

Hi, We're having an issue with TailDuplication in our out-of-tree target and it's this PHI-node that seems to be the cause of the trouble: %vreg2<def> = PHI %vreg0, <BB#2>, %vreg1, <BB#3>; rN:%vreg2 aNlh_0_7:%vreg0 aNlh_rN:%vreg1 Note that the defined %vreg2 has register class "rN" while the read %vreg0 has register class "aNlh_0_7".

You can call addIncoming(). /// addIncoming - Add an incoming value to the end of the PHI list /// void addIncoming(Value *V, BasicBlock *BB) { assert(V && "PHI node got a null value!"); assert(BB && "PHI node got a null basic block!"); assert(getType() == V->getType() && "All operands to PHI node must be the same

I am running into an issue where phi nodes are generating move instructions that are outside of the location where I want them to be generated. The default generation method seems to be to put the move instruction at the end of the preceding basic block related to that specific phi node, but I need it to place the move before some pseudo instructions that must be at the end of certain flow control

Hi, Daniel I want to profile load/store operations, in order to reduce the overhead of profiling, I try to instrument the optimized llvm ir, which has phi nodes. BTW, when the value of some load/store operations may have multi-source, then the load will be translated into phi nodes, and all phi nodes are placed in the front of BB. Sometimes, the position is not where the load happens, is there