similar to: [LLVMdev] X86 Disassembler

Hi Sean, > the attached diff implements a table-driven disassembler for the X86 > architecture (16-, 32-, and 64-bit incarnations), integrated into > the MC framework. The disassembler is table-driven, using a custom > TableGen backend to generate hierarchical tables optimized for fast > decode. The disassembler consumes MemoryObjects and produces arrays > of

Bill, thanks for your comments. I'll respond to them individually. I've attached a new revision of the patch that addresses them. Patch built and tested against SVN 79487, with the additional attached fix that fixes an Intel table bug. Sean On 2009/08/18, at 0:57, Bill Wendling wrote: > 0. Watch out for tabs! Fixed. Thanks. > 1. Includes like this "#include

On Aug 19, 2009, at 4:39 PM, Sean Callanan wrote: > thanks for your comments. I'll respond to them individually. I've > attached a new revision of the patch that addresses them. Patch > built and tested against SVN 79487, with the additional attached fix > that fixes an Intel table bug. Thanks Sean, comments below. Are you sure you attached the updated patch? I

On Jul 11, 2007, at 11:39 AM, David Greene wrote: > On Wednesday 11 July 2007 12:41, Tanya M. Lattner wrote: > >> I think the coalescer should be flexible enough to be run >> independent of >> the register allocator. For example, you may want to expose the >> copies >> induced by transforming out of SSA to the scheduler. If the >> scheduler is

Please review the enclosed patch for Sparc debug info. I have been able to view source files, set breakpoints, and single step source lines after applying this patch. I can't view variables because I haven't implemented Dwarf type data, yet. -Rich -------------- next part -------------- An embedded and charset-unspecified text was scrubbed... Name: sparcdebug.patch URL:

I was away doing other things for a while, but I have an API patch separated out, which (in addition to being much smaller than past megapatches) corrects two issues Chris identified in his most recent set of patches: - First, it makes the API a good deal simpler. Now, you can instantiate a single MCDisassembler and, each time you want an instruction disassembled, you can simply pass

Michael, I have rework the patch according to your suggestion. And I have read binutil/objdump source code and found that it has a logic that if there's no symtab, it will use dynsym, which is missing in llvm-objdump. Songmao -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: 0002-Fix-the-address-calculation-for-llvm-objdump.patch Type: text/x-patch

I'm in the process of trying to build LLVM and clang in Visual Studio 2008. Building trunk of LLVM and clang fails because of an VC STL issue: http://connect.microsoft.com/VisualStudio/feedback/ViewFeedback.aspx?Fee dbackID=328343 Here's a patch that allows tablegen to compile: Index: TableGen/ClangDiagnosticsEmitter.cpp

On Sep 6, 2009, at 1:34 PM, Richard Pennington wrote: > Please review the enclosed patch for Sparc debug info. > I have been able to view source files, set breakpoints, and single > step source lines after applying this patch. I can't view variables > because I haven't implemented Dwarf type data, yet. Cool! I'm glad to see progress on the sparc backend: +++

Hi all, BitstreamReader is the only in-tree client of the DataStreamer and MemoryObject interfaces. In practice when using user-facing LLVM tools, the bitcode will normally either be in memory or in a file, so the best way to access it is through memory, either directly or memory mapped. As part of some refactorings I am making to BitstreamReader, I would like to simplify it by changing it to

And on a separate thread [0] Derek indicated he'd be fine with removing it. I'll leave this thread open until end of Monday to receive any other opinions, then proceed to remove it. Peter [0] http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-commits/Week-of-Mon-20161024/400754.html On Fri, Oct 28, 2016 at 10:08 AM, Peter Collingbourne <peter at pcc.me.uk> wrote: > Hi all, > >

On Wed, Oct 12, 2011 at 3:17 AM, Songmao <smtian at ingenic.cn> wrote: > Michael, >    I have rework the patch according to your suggestion.  And I have read > binutil/objdump source code and found that it has a logic that if there's no > symtab, it will use dynsym, which is missing in llvm-objdump. > > Songmao > @@ -747,12 +747,28 @@ error_code

Awesome! Thanks, Rafael On 28 October 2016 at 13:14, Peter Collingbourne <peter at pcc.me.uk> wrote: > And on a separate thread [0] Derek indicated he'd be fine with removing it. > I'll leave this thread open until end of Monday to receive any other > opinions, then proceed to remove it. > > Peter > > [0] >

Hi!! This is my first time with llvm. I'm still learning and really need help. I wrote only one Function Pass, which uses another Function Pass (blockNrs), and registered this: RegisterPass<FunctionAnalysis> X("gasched", "Genom Scheduling Pass"); When I compile my sourcecode, everything was okay. But when I tried to test it, i got this error Message: nicole at

Hi Evgenii, I have one question about this (planned) change: what if a function is not inlined? The linker will not ODR merge them with this change, which isn’t great. What makes “internal” linkage more desirable than "linkonce_odr + visibility hidden"? — Mehdi > On Jul 12, 2016, at 6:16 PM, Evgenii Stepanov via llvm-dev <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: > > Hi,

Hi, I have a simple program example attached. All it does is try to derive a class from llvm::MemoryObject. Can anyone tell me why this fails to compile with this error message: clang -DHAVE_CONFIG_H -I. -I../src -I../include -I../test -I/usr/include/llvm-c-3.2 -I/usr/include/llvm-3.2 -O0 -g3 -Wall -O0 -Wall -g3 -MT mem.o -MD -MP -MF .deps/mem.Tpo -c -o mem.o mem.cpp mv -f .deps/mem.Tpo

Hi Stephan, > intrinsic float4 sample(int tex, float2 tc); > > float4 main(int tex, float2 tc) > { > float4 x = sample(tex, tc); > return 0.0; > } without additional information it would be wrong to remove the call to sample because it might write to a global variable. > As you can see, the call to the sample function is still present, > although the actual value

Good news, everybody! It's that time of year again. We are going to release LLVM 2.8! I'm taking over for Tanya to give her a much needed break. I can only hope to perform as well as she has. This is my first time as release manager, so bear with me if things don't go smoothly. This message is mostly to give you an idea of the schedule we're planning on. It's an aggressive

Hi all, as proposed in http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/pipermail/llvmdev/2009-February/020396.html I implemented the algorithm presented in [Ball94]. It only instruments the minimal number of edges necessary for edge profiling. The main changes introduced by this patch are: *) a interface compatible rewrite of ProfileInfo *) a cleanup of ProfileInfoLoader (some functionality in ProfileInfoLoader

On Wednesday 11 July 2007 15:07, Christopher Lamb wrote: > Could it be possible for there to be a harness type interface that > would allow coalescers that support both modes to be hooked into the > pass registration, and those that depend on the allocator not be > registered as passes? I have a patch for this kind of thing attached. Please take a look and let me know if it looks