similar to: [LLVMdev] using external functions from llvm

The blog post I linked to implied that adding a symbol in the form lle_X_FUNCTIONNAME would allow you to call a function called FUNCTIONNAME. Is this not the case? On Thu, Aug 19, 2010 at 6:46 PM, <o.j.sivart at gmail.com> wrote: > You are adding the symbol as "lle_X_create_number_object" yet your error > message implies you have tried to lookup and use

You are adding the symbol as "lle_X_create_number_object" yet your error message implies you have tried to lookup and use "create_number_object". Can you provide the code for the lookup? On 20/08/2010, at 8:07 AM, Alec Benzer wrote: > Is there documentation somewhere on how to call external functions from llvm? The only guide I found was this:

Ok, so calling lle_X_FUNCTIONNAME instead of FUNCTIONNAME works (is there any reason the post used the lle_X_ prefix other than convention? was it once possible to call external functions as I was originally trying, or, why did the blog post think it was possible?) I'm now running into trouble when trying to access arguments however. printing args.size() from the function yields

Alec Benzer <alecbenzer at gmail.com> writes: > Ok, so calling lle_X_FUNCTIONNAME instead of FUNCTIONNAME works (is there > any reason the post used the lle_X_ prefix other than convention? was it > once possible to call external functions as I was originally trying, or, why > did the blog post think it was possible?) AFAIK you can name the function as you please (with some

> I'm afraid that you might be utterly confused about how to use LLVM. Er, I don't think so? I think I was mostly just confused about interfacing with external functions, since whoever wrote that blog post ( http://www.gearleaf.com/blog/post/44) didn't seem to know what he was talking about (or he was doing stuff that once worked but now doesn't? I don't know). If you

On May 24, 2008, at 4:25 PM, Marcel Moolenaar wrote: > On May 24, 2008, at 12:12 PM, Bill Wendling wrote: >> Let us know if you would like extra eyes on the two PPC failures. >> Many >> of us have a lot of experience with C++. :-) Do you know where these >> allocations are? > > I don't mind if people help out, so here's some information: Nice!

Hi Daniel, On 13.09.2018. 19:32, Daniel Sanders wrote: > Could you clarify what you mean here? The new legalizer info can > define this with: >     getActionDefinitionsBuilder(G_SELECT).clampScalar(1, s32, s32) > so I'm guessing you mean that code to mutate the G_SELECT is currently > missing Yes, LegalizerHelper::widenScalar widens only TypeIdx==0, it doesn't do that

On Thu, Dec 15, 2011 at 1:17 PM, David Fang <fang at csl.cornell.edu> wrote: > Hi, > > I've bootstrapped llvm/clang from svn-trunk on powerpc-darwin8 (g++-4.0.1), and > have the following test results to share. > Summary below, full log at: > http://www.csl.cornell.edu/~fang/sw/llvm/r146586-powerpc-darwin8-results.txt > > The only edits required were those I

Hi, Thanks for the quick reply again. > On Thu, Dec 15, 2011 at 1:17 PM, David Fang <fang at csl.cornell.edu> wrote: >> Hi, >> >> I've bootstrapped llvm/clang from svn-trunk on powerpc-darwin8 (g++-4.0.1), and >> have the following test results to share. >> Summary below, full log at: >>

Hello, I am developing GlobalISel for MIPS. I have a few questions and observations about defining legality of generic instruction and also possible combining of instructions and artifacts in pre/post legalizer combiner or elsewhere (e.g. in some sort of instruction-select patterns). I look at legality as "If generic instruction can be selected into machine instruction, it is legal".

Hi, I've bootstrapped llvm/clang from svn-trunk on powerpc-darwin8 (g++-4.0.1), and have the following test results to share. Summary below, full log at: http://www.csl.cornell.edu/~fang/sw/llvm/r146586-powerpc-darwin8-results.txt The only edits required were those I posted to llvm-commits yesterday (re: "some missing clang libs"). And I also edited LitConfig.py to point to

On May 24, 2008, at 12:12 PM, Bill Wendling wrote: > Let us know if you would like extra eyes on the two PPC failures. Many > of us have a lot of experience with C++. :-) Do you know where these > allocations are? I don't mind if people help out, so here's some information: FAIL: /nfs/llvm/src/llvm/test/Transforms/PredicateSimplifier/ 2006-11-04-ReplacingZeros.ll Failed with

On Linux when I compile R 2.10.0(devel) (src/main/arithmetic.c in particular) with gcc 3.4.5 using the flags -g -O2 I get noncommutative behavior when adding NA and NaN: > NA_real_ + NaN [1] NaN > NaN + NA_real_ [1] NA If I compile src/main/arithmetic.c without optimization (just -g) then both of those return NA. On Windows, using a precompiled R 2.8.1 from CRAN I get NA for

I think I might have found a bug in the exection engine's 'constants folding'. Basically APInt's parameters are the wrong way round. Line 577 for lib/ExecutionEngine/ExecutionEngine.cpp :- case Instruction::PtrToInt: { GenericValue GV = getConstantValue(Op0); uint32_t PtrWidth = TD->getPointerSizeInBits(); GV.IntVal = APInt(PtrWidth,

Hi all, I'm trying to print to screen the value read by the fread function. I'm at the point where source refers to the GetElementPtrInst ( pointer to the buffer where fread stored the data - %5 in my case ) and the fread() has been already called. I thought the correct approach to achieve what I need was: ExecutionContext& SF = ECStack.back(); GenericValue SRC =

Hello All File llvm/lib/ExecutionEngine/Interpreter/Execution.cpp (cvs rev 1.182) fails to compile with g++ 4.1.3 (Debian/Sid/AMD64 system) make[2]: Leaving directory `/usr/src/Lang/llvm/_Obj64/lib/Target' make[2]: Entering directory `/usr/src/Lang/llvm/_Obj64/lib/ExecutionEngine' make[3]: Entering directory `/usr/src/Lang/llvm/_Obj64/lib/ExecutionEngine/Interpreter' llvm[3]:

Aaron Gray wrote: > I think I might have found a bug in the exection engine's 'constants > folding'. > > Basically APInt's parameters are the wrong way round. > > Line 577 for lib/ExecutionEngine/ExecutionEngine.cpp :- > > case Instruction::PtrToInt: { > GenericValue GV = getConstantValue(Op0); > uint32_t PtrWidth =

Hello, I've been working on turning PHP scripts into LLVM IR and I've gotten to the stage where I'm able to construct LLVM code that calls the PHP opcode handlers that I've pre-compiled to LLVM IR in the correct order. However, the PHP API is designed so that the handlers are not globally accessible (qualified by "static" in the C source). Instead they're supposed to

My experience with LLVM is limited, but I am trying to figure out how to add optimizations for automatic reference counting. The GC documentation mentions that patch-points could be useful, but it does not state how they would be useful. If this is a FAQ, please let me know... So this is my idea at this point: The context is a C++ like language with an aggregate type that is always reference

On Fri, Dec 16, 2011 at 01:51:57AM -0500, David Fang wrote: > Hi, > Thanks for the quick reply again. > >> On Thu, Dec 15, 2011 at 1:17 PM, David Fang <fang at csl.cornell.edu> wrote: >>> Hi, >>> >>> I've bootstrapped llvm/clang from svn-trunk on powerpc-darwin8 (g++-4.0.1), and >>> have the following test results to share. >>>