similar to: [LLVMdev] JIT::freeMachineCodeForFunction(Function *F) on ARM

Hello Everyone, Does void JIT::freeMachineCodeForFunction(Function *F) work on arm? I get a crash when I call it on arm.I don't have access to gdb on the simulator I am using , so can't say for sure if it works. Thanks -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL:

Hm, I wonder if the error message for llvm_unreachable should change. I think I remember a couple people focusing incorrectly on the UNREACHABLE instead of the actual error message above it (which means it's our fault, not theirs). Miranda, this is pointing at the same problem you had before. You have a function JIT-compiled, and you're trying to RAUW (ReplaceAllUsesWith) it. You'll

Hi, Was this ever resolved? I'm curious, I'm also in a situation where there may be many (very many) JITted functions over the history of an application (which may be running for many days) Thanks On Mar 20, 2009, at 7:34 AM, George Giorgidze wrote: > Hi, > > In my application I am JITing thousands of functions, though I am > doing it sequantially and running only

Hi all, I'm trying to extend the Dalvik VM to load some LLVM assembly from the SD card, JIT it, and execute it. I'm using AOSP 4.0.4, a Galaxy Nexus, and the version of LLVM that comes in the external project of AOSP (LLVM 2.8, I believe?) I have the following LLVM assembly: target datalayout =

Hi, In my application I am JITing thousands of functions, though I am doing it sequantially and running only one at a time. So it is crucial to be able to properly clean up the memory from an old JITed function when JITing and running the new one. I am using Haskell binding of LLVM and my application works OK. However, memory usage increases and never decreases during the run time of my

On Jun 30, 2009, at 11:18 AMPDT, Jeffrey Yasskin wrote: > On Mon, Jun 29, 2009 at 5:50 PM, Dale Johannesen<dalej at apple.com> > wrote: >> >> On Jun 29, 2009, at 5:41 PMPDT, Reid Kleckner wrote: >> >>> So I (think I) found a bug in the JIT: >>> http://llvm.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=4483 >>> >>> Basically, globals used by a

Hello, The problem I'm having is that I modify a function body by using 'Value::replaceAllUsesWith' and then execute it with the JIT engine several times but I always get the output from the first iteration for all the iterations. This is what I do: I generate the following 2 functions on the fly based on the FunctionType of the declaration below in C code. define i32

On Mon, Jun 29, 2009 at 5:50 PM, Dale Johannesen<dalej at apple.com> wrote: > > On Jun 29, 2009, at 5:41 PMPDT, Reid Kleckner wrote: > >> So I (think I) found a bug in the JIT: >> http://llvm.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=4483 >> >> Basically, globals used by a function are allocated in the same buffer >> as the first code that uses it.  However, when you

No. It adds a new event, 'NotifyObjectEmitted'. The Intel JIT listener that I mentioned then uses the emitted object to find the functions (which are all emitted together). Because of the way that MCJIT is implemented, it isn't really feasible to reconstruct things like the EmittedFunctionDetails in the NotifyFunctionEmitted event. -Andy -----Original Message----- From: Manny Ko

The current 3.2 code branch has events being broadcast from the MCJIT engine when a new object is emitted, but the profiling listeners do not do anything with the events (and I don't expect they will before the 3.2 release becomes official). I have implemented some code in trunk since the 3.2 branch to traverse the emitted object and pick out named functions in the IntelJITEventsListener. An

Thanks for answer, Renato. But I still thing that there is some issue with ARM codegen. When I tried running your code you modified I got exactly same LLVM IR result (verified it by comparing output from llvm-dis) - and program on runtime still produces wrong result. With some help from another developer we managed to reduce issue to following C code that is simpler: #include <stdio.h>

I see. If I am writing my own listener can I still get back the (llvm::Function, void* Code, size_t Size)? Ciao. -----Original Message----- From: Kaylor, Andrew [mailto:andrew.kaylor at intel.com] Sent: Monday, November 26, 2012 1:24 PM To: Manny Ko Cc: LLVM Developers Mailing List Subject: RE: [LLVMdev] Removing old JIT CodeEmitters for ARM and PPC No. It adds a new event,

Thanks Andrew for the update. Does it support NotifyFunctionEmitted? Cheers. -----Original Message----- From: Kaylor, Andrew [mailto:andrew.kaylor at intel.com] Sent: Monday, November 26, 2012 1:06 PM To: Manny Ko Cc: LLVM Developers Mailing List Subject: RE: [LLVMdev] Removing old JIT CodeEmitters for ARM and PPC The current 3.2 code branch has events being broadcast from the MCJIT engine

Hello all, When using the JIT on ARM, I get the following error message. The code works fine on both X86 32 and 64 bit architectures. rbx: /home/dirkjan/llvm-3.3.src/include/llvm/CodeGen/MachineOperand.h:260: unsigned int llvm::MachineOperand::getReg() const: Assertion `isReg() && "This is not a register operand!"' failed. Program received signal SIGABRT, Aborted.

Just updated the source and now I get the unreachable error again. The JIT doesn't know how to handle a RAUW on a value it has emitted. UNREACHABLE executed at /home/conrado/engines/llvm/lib/ExecutionEngine/JIT/JITEmitter.cpp:1542! I think that it's not helpful now, but I can post the program, if you want me to. On Sun, Jan 31, 2010 at 2:49 PM, Jeffrey Yasskin <jyasskin at

getFunction() -> getPointerToFunction() 2014-06-29 6:40 GMT+03:00 Yaron Keren <yaron.keren at gmail.com>: > Hi Adrian, > > freeMachineCodeForFunction is required but recompileAndLinkFunction is > not, > you can use getFunction() always. > > Try to M->dump() calling M->getFunction() where M is the Module *. > See if how the changes appear in the module

+llvmdev 2009/7/3 Merkulov Aleksey <steel1.0 at mail.ru>: >> > Hello!  Working with LLVM JIT-compiler I found a small bug and I'd like to correct it.  Namely, on some tests LLVM fails with message "JIT: Ran out of space for generated machine code!" >> >> I'm working on a patch to fix this, although I've heard DOE may change >> the

Hi all, I have some questions on some strange behavior I'm seeing with LLVM JIT in a multithreaded application. If this is the wrong forum for questions like this, I apologize, and please redirect me. The setup of the application is a singleton instance of a static Compiler object, which maintains local copies of an LLVM Module, JIT ExecutionEngine, and FunctionPassManager with registered

Hello all, I've already bothered people on IRC with this question and it was recommended to ask it here. First of all, some context. In Rubinius (http://rubini.us/, http://github.com/rubinius/rubinius) we use LLVM for our JIT. We create LLVM IR using the C++ API and turn that into machine code using ExecutionEngine::runJITOnFunction. The resulting native code is then installed as the

<ccing llvmdev> On Thu, 23 Mar 2006, Eric van Riet Paap wrote: > I am experimenting with the LLVM JIT as a future codegenerator for the PyPy > JIT. The basics are working which I am extremely happy with! Great! > Maybe you could answer a few questions? (I'm away until monday) > > * Is there a way to show the generated code? Yes, pass -print-machineinstrs into the LLVM