similar to: [LLVMdev] LLVM C bindings and Boehm GC

Hi, I'm running LLVM bitcode generated by my compiler under lli. The bitcode is linked against Boehm GC (lli -load=/usr/lib/libgc.so). It looks like Boehm GC isn't scanning global variables and as a result objects referenced only through globals are being prematurely collected. I understand that Boehm GC needs to see the data segment containing my global variables as a root. For native

I've implemented this by adding calls to GC_add_roots(<first global in module>,<last global in module>+1) to the llvm.global_ctors before any other static initialization code for the module. This should be safe assuming that: - global variables are laid out in memory in the order they appear in their module (and ideally contiguously without being interleaved with any other values)

You should look at http://llvm.org/viewvc/llvm-project/llvm/trunk/include/llvm/ExecutionEngine/JITMemoryManager.h?view=markup and see if inheriting from that and overriding allocateGlobal() will do what you want. I'm a little surprised the boehm gc doesn't already see the globals, since there's a reference to their memory from the JMM, but maybe it doesn't scan mmap regions by

I'm having a curious issue with LLD/x86_64 linux/elf (Ubuntu 14.04); Where the l_addr of the link_map is invalid when linked with lld, but is fine with gnu ld. I'm using the libgc (boehm) code which when initializing reads the DYNAMIC/DEBUG link_map data, and crashes because the l_addr field has value out of readable memory. The strange this is that it happens only on some linux

I'm hoping to have a stab at getting a tiny language implementation up and running soon. I assume I can just pull in Boehm's GC to get a very rudimentary collector up and running. However, can this work using JIT compilation from OCaml or will the new GC try to traverse the OCaml program's own stack? -- Dr Jon D Harrop, Flying Frog Consultancy Ltd.

The virtual machine I'm implementing allocates objects on the heap using Boehm's garbage collector. I currently have an interpreter working for my language, and I'm working on a JIT that will compile some of the functions that would otherwise get interpreted. What I'm wondering is whether or not I need to perform special adjustments for the GC to work properly. My understanding is

On 17/09/10 09:55, Pedro Ferreira wrote: > As I understand it, LLVM simply gives you support for garbage collectors > that you have to implement yourself and link into the final binary, > similar to what C's malloc does (it's a library call). The issue with > GC's is that they need to be provided info about the stack, thats where > LLVM's support comes in. Are there

Hello, I've been able to get J3 working with the single and multimap garbage collectors but have hit several snags with Boehm and MMTk. For MMTk I get here: Buildfile: /cs/student/kyleklein/vmkit/mmtk/java/build.xml main: [mkdir] Created dir: /cs/student/kyleklein/vmkit/mmtk/java/classes [javac] Compiling 373 source files to /cs/student/kyleklein/vmkit/mmtk/java/classes

Hi, This is regarding Dtrace usability for memory leak detection. We have real-time application written C++ which runs on Solaris 10 having a problem that''s the my application grows in size from 130 Mb to 450Mb in around 15 days. So there is two possibilities with the application growth of memory due to Size growth of Dictionary Objects (Like Maps) and Memory Leak.

As the Boehm GC is an available option, do I take that to mean it's beneficial for some users but not most? -- Daniel

Hi, I would like to build an x86 executable consisting of a number of subsystems (mostly legacy C code). One subsystem will be compiled to native code using llvm. It calls, and is called by, the other subsystems, many of which have to be compiled using gcc because they use small amounts of inline assembly. All of the subsystems catch and throw errors to one another using setjmp/longjmp. When

On Fri, 2010-09-17 at 12:16 +0100, David Given wrote: > On 17/09/10 09:55, Pedro Ferreira wrote: > > As I understand it, LLVM simply gives you support for garbage collectors > > that you have to implement yourself and link into the final binary, > > similar to what C's malloc does (it's a library call). The issue with > > GC's is that they need to be provided

After a several-month hiatus, I've returned to working on my main LLVM project. However, after checking out the latest LLVM head I'm encountering a new problem. When I attempt to load my custom plugin pass into opt, I'm getting this error message: dyld: lazy symbol binding failed: Symbol not found: __ZN4llvm2cl3optIbLb0ENS0_6parserIbEEE4doneEv Referenced from:

Hello, It would be nice if we could get a full list of packages which have a wrong sha1 checksum. I don't have the bandwidth for a full mirror of all of Dag's rpms and i also don't have shell access to such a mirror. So a small request for a mirror admin: The following checks the files repodata/*.xml.gz against the sha1 sums in repomd.xml and checks the RPMS/*.rpm files against

Hi, When running my own lld generated library/executable I'm getting: LD_LIBRARY_PATH=. ./ConsoleApplication347 ./ConsoleApplication347: symbol lookup error: ./ConsoleApplication347: undefined symbol: (theres nothing after undefined symbol) How can I figure out what's I'm doing wrong? Full log: https://gist.github.com/carlokok/1dd510a16e1922271b520f1c00b14656 readelf -s for

Hi Talin, > After a several-month hiatus, I've returned to working on my main LLVM project. > However, after checking out the latest LLVM head I'm encountering a new problem. > When I attempt to load my custom plugin pass into opt, I'm getting this error > message: > > dyld: lazy symbol binding failed: Symbol not found: >

For anyone who encounters this issue in the future, my issue was the configuration of llvm-gcc. Configure with --with-llvmgccdir=YOUR/PATH doesn't work, instead you are supposed to use --with-llvmgcc=PATH/TO/llvm-gcc and --with-llvmgxx=/PATH/TO/llvm-g++ That will at least get you past my error. Best, Kyle Quoting nicolas geoffray <nicolas.geoffray at gmail.com>: > I am

[cross-posted from bioc-devel list] Hi all, I have a subtle question related to how R CMD SHLIB handles variables in make child processes. In more detail: I am the maintainer of the 'msa' package which has been in Bioconductor since April 2015. This package integrates three open-source libraries for multiple sequence alignment. This is organized in the following way: in src/, there

Please, try exten => 99,1,Wait,1 exten => 99,2,Record,/tmp/pcmfile:pcm exten => 99,3,Wait,1 exten => 99,4,Playback,/tmp/pcmfile exten => 99,5,Wait,1 exten => 99,6,Record,/tmp/voxfile:vox exten => 99,7,Wait,1 exten => 99,8,Playback,/tmp/voxfile (put your own extension). Pcm recording is OK, playback is OK. Adpcm recording is noticeably worse. Adpcm playback is very

As I understand it, LLVM simply gives you support for garbage collectors that you have to implement yourself and link into the final binary, similar to what C's malloc does (it's a library call). The issue with GC's is that they need to be provided info about the stack, thats where LLVM's support comes in. As far as I know, the garbage collector is linked into the final binary