similar to: [LLVMdev] Troubles with llvm.gcroot and exception handling

Hi all, I'm toying around with LLVM's GC support and am struggling with the following. I have a little test snippet (a .ll file with IR) that uses llvm.gcroot to mark a GC root, but when I compile it to assembly with llc, followed by generating an executable with gcc I get an error related to exception handling: 22:40|melis at juggle2:~/projects/llvm_gc> cat root.ll %obj = type { i8*,

Paul Melis <llvm at assumetheposition.nl> writes: > It seems that the llvm-config generated when building through CMake does > not contain -lpthread on my 32-bit Core2Duo Gentoo Linux system (even > though I configured with LLVM_ENABLE_PTHREADS). I get missing symbols > during linking of e.g. the JIT tutorial code: [snip] This should be fixed now. Now about this one: >

Hi Oscar, Óscar Fuentes wrote: > Paul Melis <llvm at assumetheposition.nl> writes: > > [snip] > > Thanks! Fixed. > > BTW, bug reports are welcome. > It seems that the llvm-config generated when building through CMake does not contain -lpthread on my 32-bit Core2Duo Gentoo Linux system (even though I configured with LLVM_ENABLE_PTHREADS). I get missing symbols

Óscar Fuentes wrote: > Paul Melis <llvm at assumetheposition.nl> writes: > > >> It seems that the llvm-config generated when building through CMake does >> not contain -lpthread on my 32-bit Core2Duo Gentoo Linux system (even >> though I configured with LLVM_ENABLE_PTHREADS). I get missing symbols >> during linking of e.g. the JIT tutorial code: >>

Hello all, Does anyone have any inside why I can't get the below simple C API test to link? This is on a 32-bit Gentoo Linux system and LLVM TOT which was compiled with enable-optimized, gcc is 4.3.2. 15:26|melis at juggle2:~/c/llvmpy> cat t.c #include "llvm-c/Core.h" int main() { LLVMContextRef ctx; ctx = LLVMContextCreate(); return 0; } 15:29|melis at

Paul Melis wrote: > Óscar Fuentes wrote: > >> Paul Melis <llvm at assumetheposition.nl> writes: >> >> >> >>> It seems that the llvm-config generated when building through CMake does >>> not contain -lpthread on my 32-bit Core2Duo Gentoo Linux system (even >>> though I configured with LLVM_ENABLE_PTHREADS). I get missing

"Paul Melis" <llvm at assumetheposition.nl> writes: > 15:29|melis at juggle2:~/c/llvmpy> gcc -W -Wall -o blah `llvm-config --cflags > --ldflags --libs all` t.c > /tmp/ccs4MbKp.o: In function `main': > t.c:(.text+0x21): undefined reference to `LLVMContextCreate' > collect2: ld returned 1 exit status > > 15:29|melis at juggle2:~/c/llvmpy> nm

"Paul Melis" <llvm at assumetheposition.nl> writes: >>> 15:29|melis at juggle2:~/c/llvmpy> gcc -W -Wall -o blah `llvm-config >>> --cflags >>> --ldflags --libs all` t.c >>> /tmp/ccs4MbKp.o: In function `main': >>> t.c:(.text+0x21): undefined reference to `LLVMContextCreate' >>> collect2: ld returned 1 exit status

On Wed, Apr 28, 2010 at 12:16 PM, Paul Melis <llvm at assumetheposition.nl>wrote: > On 04/27/10 00:20, Talin wrote: > > On Mon, Apr 26, 2010 at 12:44 AM, Paul Melis <llvm at assumetheposition.nl>wrote: > >> Hi, >> >> Talin wrote: >> > I'm a little confused as to the rules for the arguments to llvm.gcroot, >> > which says it must be

On 04/29/10 21:27, Talin wrote: > On Wed, Apr 28, 2010 at 12:16 PM, Paul Melis > <llvm at assumetheposition.nl <mailto:llvm at assumetheposition.nl>> wrote: > > On 04/27/10 00:20, Talin wrote: >> On Mon, Apr 26, 2010 at 12:44 AM, Paul Melis >> <llvm at assumetheposition.nl <mailto:llvm at assumetheposition.nl>> wrote: >> >>

The langref says for the 'add' instruction: Syntax: <result> = add <ty> <op1>, <op2> ; yields {ty}:result <result> = nuw add <ty> <op1>, <op2> ; yields {ty}:result <result> = nsw add <ty> <op1>, <op2> ; yields {ty}:result <result> = nuw nsw add <ty> <op1>, <op2> ;

Paul Melis wrote: > Paul Melis wrote: > >> Jim Grosbach wrote: >> >>> On Aug 30, 2009, at 10:18 AM, Paul Melis wrote: >>> >>> >>>> Hello, >>>> >>>> Bill Wendling wrote: >>>> >>>>> Before we had buildbots, a random patch would break the system. It >>>>>

On 04/27/10 00:20, Talin wrote: > On Mon, Apr 26, 2010 at 12:44 AM, Paul Melis > <llvm at assumetheposition.nl <mailto:llvm at assumetheposition.nl>> wrote: > > Hi, > > Talin wrote: > > I'm a little confused as to the rules for the arguments to > llvm.gcroot, > > which says it must be a pointer alloca. I'm not sure whether

On Mon, Apr 26, 2010 at 12:44 AM, Paul Melis <llvm at assumetheposition.nl>wrote: > Hi, > > Talin wrote: > > I'm a little confused as to the rules for the arguments to llvm.gcroot, > > which says it must be a pointer alloca. I'm not sure whether that means > it > > must be an alloca (which is always a pointer by definition) or an alloca > > *of* a

Chuck Robey wrote: >>>> >>>> >>> Uh? My FreeBSD installment has `make' and no `gmake'. `make' is indeed >>> BSD make. >>> > > In your FreeBSD system, do an "ls -d /var/db/pkg/gmake*" and see if any > directory shows up. If it does, then the only argument you can have is what > name you

Paul Melis <llvm at assumetheposition.nl> writes: > Hi, just chiming in here... > > Óscar Fuentes wrote: >> [...] >> >> This is a simple guide for using cmake with LLVM: >> >> http://www.llvm.org/docs/CMake.html >> >> The makefiles distributed with LLVM have nothing to do with cmake. >>From the few times I tried building LLVM with

Hi, Talin wrote: > I'm a little confused as to the rules for the arguments to llvm.gcroot, > which says it must be a pointer alloca. I'm not sure whether that means it > must be an alloca (which is always a pointer by definition) or an alloca > *of* a pointer. I'm pretty sure it should be "alloca of a pointer", as the first argument of llvm.gcroot has type i8**.

Paul Melis wrote: > Jim Grosbach wrote: >> >> On Aug 30, 2009, at 10:18 AM, Paul Melis wrote: >> >>> Hello, >>> >>> Bill Wendling wrote: >>>> Before we had buildbots, a random patch would break the system. It >>>> would sometimes take a whole day to determine which patch broke it. >>> I see the buildbots are currently

Thanks for the example code. Its gives a good idea how the shadow stack works. But I have another question. Using the shadow stack is a nice and simple way to implement GC, but it might have a large runtime overhead per function call. Is there another way to preserve garbage specific information (gcroots) through the llvm optimizer and native code generator? This information could be used to

Paul Melis wrote: > Hi, > > Óscar Fuentes wrote: >> Chuck Robey <chuckr at telenix.org> writes: >> >> >>>> Just checked that the makefiles generated by cmake work with `make' on >>>> FreeBSD 7.2 x86. The build fails while building `opt' because libdl is >>>> missing. >>>> >>> They