similar to: [LLVMdev] compiling llvm src into llvm bitcode

> Is there an easy way to compile llvm src code into llvm bitcode? Would just > changing CC in the makefile work? Pass the -emit-llvm flag to llvm-gcc or clang. You can put it in CFLAGS. Ciao, Duncan.

Greetings, I am trying to compile a linux kernel module (currently a small part of the gpu driver) into the bitcode ".bc" format so that I can run a pass on it using the "opt" command. This pass will count the number of times copy_to/from_user() is invoked. Compiling the gnu driver kernel modules works with clang as a front end. However, I am unable to get the

Hi Kevin, On 01/06/13 09:59, Kevin Boos wrote: > Greetings, > > I am trying to compile a linux kernel module (currently a small part of the gpu driver) into the bitcode ".bc" format so that I can run a pass on it using the "opt" command. This pass will count the number of times copy_to/from_user() is invoked. > > Compiling the gnu driver kernel modules works

Greatings, I am encountering the same issue with Kevin. Does anyone know how to compile the linux kernel to .bc file? Is there any oneline guide for this? Thanks!~ Bests,Ping > Date: Sat, 1 Jun 2013 20:15:56 +0200 > From: baldrick at free.fr > To: llvmdev at cs.uiuc.edu > Subject: Re: [LLVMdev] Compile Linux Kernel module into LLVM bitcode > > Hi Kevin, >

Hi, What is the proper way of enabling bitcode on iOS platform? I pass -fembed-bitcode in CFLAGS but it looks like it does not work on assembly files. Thanks, Pavel -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://lists.xiph.org/pipermail/opus/attachments/20151019/ab393204/attachment.htm

> You can use Clang to compile source to bitcode: > > clang -c hello.c -emit-llvm -o hello.bc > Yes. My problem is to automatically create .bc files with ./configure && make. Ideally, when compiling a project like "grep", I'd like to obtain a single .bc file containing all the project's functions, instead of the grep binary executable. I already tried

Hi all, I'm trying to compile projects into LLVM Bitcode files instead of executable binaries, without needing to change the Makefile and the configure script. What is the simplest way of doing that ? Thanks Julien

Hello, With clang/llvm 9.0 adding support for ASM GOTOs, it is now possible to compile the latest Linux kernel with clang without any modification. However, is it possible to generate a single bitcode for the whole Linux kernel? Earlier approaches would involve hacks, like compiling separate bitcode files and then linking with llvm-link, or using wllvm, or using some other wrapper. Frequently,

On 9/22/11 4:04 PM, Jinwook Shin wrote: > Thanks John. I appreciate your help. De nada. > > I have taken the libLTO approach and it worked like a charm :) For > those who wanted to achieve the same thing, below are the steps I've > taken. > > John -- a small question: I thought I wouldn't need to touch > Makefiles at all, but that wasn't the case. Could

Hi list, As long as I know English the word "bit" is a "small pice", . Why in set of documentation ir is "bytecode", in other set or llvm source is "bitecode"? What is the right? Different people call the same thing such differently. -- best regards Ariel -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL:

You can use Clang to compile source to bitcode: clang -c hello.c -emit-llvm -o hello.bc Hope that helps, Philip -----Original Message----- From: llvmdev-bounces at cs.uiuc.edu [mailto:llvmdev-bounces at cs.uiuc.edu] On Behalf Of Julien Henry Sent: Friday, May 20, 2011 10:42 AM To: LLVM Developers Mailing List Subject: [LLVMdev] Compile a project into LLVM Bitcode Hi all, I'm trying to

Thanks John. I appreciate your help. I have taken the libLTO approach and it worked like a charm :) For those who wanted to achieve the same thing, below are the steps I've taken. John -- a small question: I thought I wouldn't need to touch Makefiles at all, but that wasn't the case. Could you take a look at Step 4) and tell me what you think? Thanks! 1) Create your own libLTO and

Hi Sandeep, > Another use for build attributes would be as a means to record the > build flags selected for each translation unit so that LTO could know > how to optimize/tune the result. This use seems more important to > solve than the ARM attributes under discussion here. why not have your build system just pass the appropriate flags directly to the linker? Also, suppose some

Hello, Chris's "keynote" at the LLVM Developers' Conference included a call for code owners, and my company has a heavy dependency on Bitcode, I propose taking ownership of: lib/Bitcode/* include/Bitcode/* This means that I'll be committed to documenting (yay) the implementation and responsible for reviewing patches and commits, as well as overall code quality and

On 8/19/11 4:36 PM, Jinwook Shin (HOTWING) wrote: > > Thanks John. Your approach worked fine for my small toy program. Now, > I would like to run my module pass on a huge project (still a single > executable) consisting of a few thousand bit code files scattered in > many different directories. And some of them are static libraries. Do > you still think it's a good idea

Thanks John. Your approach worked fine for my small toy program. Now, I would like to run my module pass on a huge project (still a single executable) consisting of a few thousand bit code files scattered in many different directories. And some of them are static libraries. Do you still think it's a good idea to manually gather and link them with llvm-ld? I've seen other module pass

Anyone, can you say what was the reason to rename bytecode? I am still interesting in 2010/9/29 Duncan Sands <baldrick at free.fr> Hi Ariel, > As long as I know English the word "bit" is a "small pice", . Why in set of > documentation ir is "bytecode", in other set or llvm source is "bitecode"? > What is the right? Different people call the

Hi Joe, > Chris's "keynote" at the LLVM Developers' Conference included a call for code > owners, and my company has a heavy dependency on Bitcode, I propose taking > ownership of: > > lib/Bitcode/* > include/Bitcode/* > > This means that I'll be committed to documenting (yay) the implementation and > responsible for reviewing patches and commits,

Hi Joe, > We have a tool which reads in bitcode, processes it, and re-emits it. We use > this tool as a flexible way to integrate our tool into the Xcode, Android NDK, > Chromium, and Linux build process. > > The problem we face is that bitcode changes, and when it does… future versions > can read it, but past versions are left in the lurch. For instance LLVM 3.2svn > can

Thanks for your response! On 30/01/2019 20:18, Rui Ueyama wrote: > Hi Josef, > > Let me clarify my understanding. Do you want to keep original bitcode > files in the output executable when doing LTO, so that the resulting > executable contains both compiled bitcode (which is in native machine > instructions) and original bitcode files? Exactly! Kind of analogous to what