similar to: [LLVMdev] Alignment for Alloca Inst in llvm 2.6

I am writing a transformation that needs to add a call to a function F() at the beginning of main() with the addresses of argc and argv as parameters to F(). However, the bytecode file I'm transforming has not allocated space on the stack for argc and argv. So, I developed my transformation to change main() from: ----- int main(int %argc, sbyte** %argv){ entry: ... // some use of

After looking at this problem longer, I believe that there is something wrong with the disassembler. When I run my transformation and then disassemble the output, I get bytecode that looks like: ----- int %main(int %argc, sbyte** %argv) { entry: alloca int ; <int*>:0 [#uses=3] alloca sbyte** ; <sbyte***>:0 [#uses=3] store int %argc,

Hi: When I try to execute lli -force-interpreter=true hello.bc, it gave the following error: LLVM ERROR: Tried to execute an unknown external function: i32 (i8*)* puts I think the error is because C library is not being linked with the byte code, but I was not able to find any helpful instruction in lli's document. Can you please teach me how to do it? Thanks Xu The hello.bc is

On 25 Dec 2007, at 03:29, Gordon Henriksen wrote: > Hi Jo, > > On 2007-12-24, at 14:43, Joachim Durchholz wrote: > >> I'm in a very preliminary phase of a language project which requires >> some specific optimizations to be reasonably efficient. >> >> LLVM already looks very good; I'd just like to know whether I can >> push these optimizations

hi, Dale Johannesen wrote: > On Oct 19, 2007, at 7:23 AM, Dietmar Ebner wrote: >> i'm trying to make some experiments with the ARM backend (llvm 2.1) >> and >> therefore built an arm-softfloat-linux-gnu toolchain on x86_64 linux. >> >> however, the llvm-gcc frontend seems to cause troubles with single >> precision floating point values, i.e., they are

Hi LLVM and GCC developers, My sincere thanks will goto: * Duncan, the core developer of llvm-gcc and dragonegg http://llvm.org/devmtg/2009-10/Sands_LLVMGCCPlugin.pdf * David, the innovator and developer of GCC https://dmalcolm.fedorapeople.org/gcc/global-state/requirements.html and others who give me kind response for teaching me patiently and carefully about how to migrate GCC v4.8.x to

On 8 March 2010 19:51, Arushi Aggarwal <arushi987 at gmail.com> wrote: > > 2. I notice that the setAlignment method for an AllocaInst takes an > unsigned. For 64 bit systems, alignment could potentially be larger. Is > there a reason why the alignment should be restricted to this size? > Thanks in advance > Would it ever be practical to align a stack variable to an 8 GiB

Xu Yang wrote: > Hi: > > When I try to execute lli -force-interpreter=true hello.bc, it gave the > following error: > > LLVM ERROR: Tried to execute an unknown external function: i32 (i8*)* puts > > I think the error is because C library is not being linked with the byte > code, but I was not able to find any helpful instruction in lli's document. > > Can you

On Dec 25, 2007, at 9:07 AM, Arnold Schwaighofer wrote: > On 25 Dec 2007, at 03:29, Gordon Henriksen wrote: > >> Hi Jo, >> >> On 2007-12-24, at 14:43, Joachim Durchholz wrote: >> >>> I'm in a very preliminary phase of a language project which requires >>> some specific optimizations to be reasonably efficient. >>> >>> LLVM

On Oct 19, 2007, at 7:23 AM, Dietmar Ebner wrote: > hi, > > i'm trying to make some experiments with the ARM backend (llvm 2.1) > and > therefore built an arm-softfloat-linux-gnu toolchain on x86_64 linux. > > however, the llvm-gcc frontend seems to cause troubles with single > precision floating point values, i.e., they are not converted > correctly > to the

Hi Jo, On 2007-12-24, at 14:43, Joachim Durchholz wrote: > I'm in a very preliminary phase of a language project which requires > some specific optimizations to be reasonably efficient. > > LLVM already looks very good; I'd just like to know whether I can > push these optimizations through LLVM to the JIT phase (which, as > far as I understand the docs, is a

hi, i've got some more things to note. first, the issue is not related to x86_64 being the host machine - it also happens on i686/linux. next, i think (one of) the problem(s) is the use of [HOST_]WORDS_BIG_ENDIAN instead of [HOST_]FLOAT_WORDS_BIG_ENDIAN in llvm-convert.cpp (see patch below). this fixes single precision floating point but breaks double precision. for

hi, i'm trying to make some experiments with the ARM backend (llvm 2.1) and therefore built an arm-softfloat-linux-gnu toolchain on x86_64 linux. however, the llvm-gcc frontend seems to cause troubles with single precision floating point values, i.e., they are not converted correctly to the particular target format (double precision works as expected). it seems the problem is related to

Hi all, I'm in a very preliminary phase of a language project which requires some specific optimizations to be reasonably efficient. LLVM already looks very good; I'd just like to know whether I can push these optimizations through LLVM to the JIT phase (which, as far as I understand the docs, is a pretty powerful part of LLVM). The optimizations that I need to get to work are: *

Given 2 GEPs as follows, %tmp124 = getelementptr inbounds %struct.termbox* %termptr.1, i32 0, i32 5, !dbg !1051 ; <[2 x i16]*> [#uses=1] %tmp125 = getelementptr inbounds [2 x i16]* %tmp124, i64 0, i64 0, !dbg !1051 ; <i16*> [#uses=1] can I replace the 2nd one with %tmp126 = getelementptr inbounds %struct.termbox* %termptr.1, i32 0, i32 5, i64 0, i64 0 ; <i16*> When I try to

On Mon, Apr 4, 2011 at 5:02 PM, Arushi Aggarwal <arushi987 at gmail.com> wrote: > > >> Hi, >> Is it correct to convert, >>   %196 = load i32* %195, align 8                  ; <i32> [#uses=1] >>   %197 = zext i32 %196 to i64                     ; <i64> [#uses=1] >>   %198 = ptrtoint i8* %193 to i64                 ; <i64> [#uses=1]

Thanks John. You are right. Is this also true for constant GEP expressions? Do they also create a pointer to the calculated type? The language manual does not state so explicitly. Arushi On Thu, Feb 24, 2011 at 10:47 AM, John Criswell <criswell at illinois.edu>wrote: > On 2/24/11 10:39 AM, Arushi Aggarwal wrote: > >> Given 2 GEPs as follows, >> >> %tmp124 =

Dear all, First of all, Merry Christmas! :) While testing a File I/O sample program, I've encountered a link failure due to missing implementation of "\01__isoc99_fscanf" function. I think this function should be named "__isoc99_fscanf" instead. Please see the program code and LLVM IR generated by DragonEgg and clang below. It shows that clang generates

Good afternoon! I'm trying to write an LLVM codegen for a Standard ML compiler (MLton). So far things seem to match up quite nicely, but I have hit two sticking points. I'm hoping LLVM experts might know how to handle these two cases better. 1: In ML we have some types that are actually one of several possible types. Expressed in C this might be thought of as a union. The codegen only

On 4/4/2011 6:45 PM, Eli Friedman wrote: > On Mon, Apr 4, 2011 at 5:02 PM, Arushi Aggarwal<arushi987 at gmail.com> wrote: >> >>> Hi, >>> Is it correct to convert, >>> %196 = load i32* %195, align 8 ;<i32> [#uses=1] >>> %197 = zext i32 %196 to i64 ;<i64> [#uses=1] >>> %198 =