similar to: [LLVMdev] LLVM's GC support

On Mon, 19 Jul 2004, Tobias Nurmiranta wrote: > Regarding llvm.gcroot, do I have to allocate stack-space for all > pointers in a function? Right now I mostly use SSA-variables, and let > llvm's register allocation allocate stack-space when needed. Yes. This reflects the fact that the GC can move objects (to compact the heap) at unpredictable times. > Also, what happens when I

Hi, Regarding llvm.gcroot, do I have to allocate stack-space for all pointers in a function? Right now I mostly use SSA-variables, and let llvm's register allocation allocate stack-space when needed. Also, what happens when I run the mem2reg pass, does it handle llvm.gcroot's that are moved from stack to registers? I'm thinking along the lines, that should one not use llvm.gcroot on

Thanks for reviving this. I completely forgot the details but I resolved this problem. Looking though the code, seems I forked RewriteStatepointsForGC pass, and change it to adding 'gc-livevars' bundle to the call/invoke inst after finding the livevars, instead of changing it to StatepointCall intrinsic. On Wed, Nov 14, 2018 at 11:48 AM Philip Reames <listmail at philipreames.com>

Hi I'm using a GC that's pretty similar to the OCaml one. It records stack locations using llvm.gcroot, and dumps out a frametable describing the live stack offsets so that the GC runtime can walk them as required. I'm on 2.3, not svn head. I'm having some trouble with pointers being cached in registers across function calls (at least x86 backend, haven't tried others yet).

Hi Team, I'm working on a new pure functional language and I'm trying to add GC support for that. Because all vars are immutable, the IR that my frontend generates are all register based, i.e. no alloca, and no readmem, writemem unless accessing/constructing structs. If I use the traditional GC with gcroot intrinsic, it will need to emit more code for liveness tracking, storing the IR

On Mon, 19 Jul 2004, Chris Lattner wrote: > On Mon, 19 Jul 2004, Tobias Nurmiranta wrote: > > > Regarding llvm.gcroot, do I have to allocate stack-space for all > > pointers in a function? Right now I mostly use SSA-variables, and let > > llvm's register allocation allocate stack-space when needed. > > Yes. This reflects the fact that the GC can move objects (to

I'm trying to add gcoot functionality to my code and I'm confused by why gcroot is assuming to be an i8** I'm using i32 as object and array pointers and if I make them i8 things seem to work. I'm generating IR much like http://llvm.org/docs/GarbageCollection.html#llvm-ir-features void @llvm.gcroot(i8** %ptrloc, i8* %metadata) -------------- next part -------------- An HTML

On Mon, Apr 21, 2008 at 8:13 PM, Gordon Henriksen <gordonhenriksen at mac.com> wrote: > > Hi Terence, > > > I think you're getting hung up on the details of the shadow stack collector. > The shadow stack is a GC that is possible within this framework, but of > course could be implemented without any special support. Its presence is > more misleading than anything

Hi Terence, I think you're getting hung up on the details of the shadow stack collector. The shadow stack is a GC that is possible within this framework, but of course could be implemented without any special support. Its presence is more misleading than anything else. Taking a step back, the concepts are: llvm.gcroot instructs the code generator --> My GC needs to be able to

Hi Scott, On Sep 22, 2008, at 20:59, Scott Graham wrote: > I'm using a GC that's pretty similar to the OCaml one. It records > stack locations using llvm.gcroot, and dumps out a frametable > describing the live stack offsets so that the GC runtime can walk > them as required. I'm on 2.3, not svn head. > > I'm having some trouble with pointers being cached

On 2008-04-27, at 21:29, Lane Schwartz wrote: > Hi guys, Hi Lane! This is a lot of questions. I'm not going to answer each individually, but will instead give general guidance to help you avoid the pain points… > I somehow need to inform the garbage collection runtime (my > copycollector.c) about my variables - specifically about gc roots. > So, after I get new memory

On Apr 20, 2008, at 6:52 PM, Gordon Henriksen wrote: > On 2008-04-20, at 21:05, Terence Parr wrote: > >> On Apr 20, 2008, at 5:36 PM, Gordon Henriksen wrote: >> >>> Since the semispace heap doesn't actually work (it's an example, >>> at best), I suggest you simply copy the stack visitor into your >>> project; it's only a dozen lines of

On Apr 20, 2008, at 5:36 PM, Gordon Henriksen wrote: > The shadow stack walker is in the runtime directory with the semispace > heap example. The runtime directory is built to LLVM IR using llvm- > gcc. So it's skipped unless you configure llvm with llvm-gcc support. doh! That's how I missed the binary. thanks! > Since the semispace heap doesn't actually work (it's

Howdy do LLVM folks! I've exhausted what I can do on my own to make a GC example bind (usual googling, reading, playing, looking at source). I can't find the shadow collector lib or perhaps the -l options needed to link my sample (not even to point where I'm figuring out GC actually as I can't link). Not sure this IR is correct but here is what I've been playing

On 10/25/13 1:10 PM, Ben Karel wrote: > > > > On Thu, Oct 24, 2013 at 6:42 PM, Sanjoy Das <sanjoy at azulsystems.com > <mailto:sanjoy at azulsystems.com>> wrote: > > Hi Rafael, Andrew, > > Thank you for the prompt reply. > > One approach we've been considering involves representing the > constraint "pointers to heap objects

On Mon, 19 Jul 2004, Tobias Nurmiranta wrote: > > Not currently. In the future this will definitely be improved. In > > particular, when the code generators are enhanced to provide more accurate > > mapping information for GC pointers (e.g. which registers contain > > pointers), we can do this. This is in the long term plans, but I suspect > > that performance will

On Fri, Oct 25, 2013 at 8:35 PM, Philip Reames <listmail at philipreames.com>wrote: > On 10/25/13 1:10 PM, Ben Karel wrote: > > > > > On Thu, Oct 24, 2013 at 6:42 PM, Sanjoy Das <sanjoy at azulsystems.com>wrote: > >> Hi Rafael, Andrew, >> >> Thank you for the prompt reply. >> >> One approach we've been considering involves

On 2008-04-20, at 21:05, Terence Parr wrote: > On Apr 20, 2008, at 5:36 PM, Gordon Henriksen wrote: > >> Since the semispace heap doesn't actually work (it's an example, at >> best), I suggest you simply copy the stack visitor into your >> project; it's only a dozen lines of code or so. > > > Ok, copying; can't find ShadowStackEntry though.

On Sun, Apr 27, 2008 at 9:34 PM, Gordon Henriksen <gordonhenriksen at mac.com> wrote: > As for the compiler plugin interface, I suggest you ignore it > initially and use the provided shadow-stack option for the time being. > The shadow stack generates significantly suboptimal code, but will let > you avoid writing some platform-specific code. Instead, simply copy > the

I'm also highly interested in relocating-GC support from LLVM. Up until now my GC implementation has been non-relocating which is obviously kind of a bummer given that it inhibits certain classes of memory allocation/deallocation tricks. I wrote up a bunch of my findings on the implementation of my GC here: https://code.google.com/p/epoch-language/wiki/GarbageCollectionScheme Frankly I