similar to: [LLVMdev] Subtle breaking change in LLVM 2.7 to 2.8 transition

Hi Ben, > I updated my from LLVM 2.7 to 2.8/trunk tonight and was mystified as to why my > GC plugin silently stopped working. > > The problem was that the signature of the virtual function > GCMetadataPrinter::finishAssembly (and beginAssembly) changed. > > This change would probably be an excellent candidate for the "gotchas" section > of the 2.8 release notes.

On Mon, Sep 13, 2010 at 5:17 AM, Duncan Sands <baldrick at free.fr> wrote: > Hi Ben, > > > I updated my from LLVM 2.7 to 2.8/trunk tonight and was mystified as to > why my > > GC plugin silently stopped working. > > > > The problem was that the signature of the virtual function > > GCMetadataPrinter::finishAssembly (and beginAssembly) changed. >

Ping for this. On 02/10/2013 08:47 PM, Yiannis Tsiouris wrote: > After rebasing my local LLVM repo to ToT, I noticed that the > finishAssembly function is not executed and, thus, the stack map is not > printed at all. > > Is this a known issue or I 'm doing something wrong? > > I used a custom GCMetadataPrinter plugin but I reproduced this using the > builtin

Hi, After rebasing my local LLVM repo to ToT, I noticed that the finishAssembly function is not executed and, thus, the stack map is not printed at all. Is this a known issue or I 'm doing something wrong? I used a custom GCMetadataPrinter plugin but I reproduced this using the builtin "ocaml" GC plugin and the attached file (actually, any simple ll file that uses

Sorry for the triple-posting! :-$ On 02/14/2013 04:30 PM, Yiannis Tsiouris wrote: > On 02/10/2013 08:47 PM, Yiannis Tsiouris wrote: >> After rebasing my local LLVM repo to ToT, I noticed that the >> finishAssembly function is not executed and, thus, the stack map is not >> printed at all. >> >> Is this a known issue or I 'm doing something wrong? >>

Hello Yiannis, I believe what is going on is that there is an issue with the way that information is deleted (the CG information). Right now there is a pass whose only job is to delete that information (CGInfoDeleter) and that pass deletes the info before the AsmPrinter has a chance to call the finishAssembly function. Right now the order that the doFinalization is called on passes is the reverse

Hi, I have the solution to my problem :). And the llvm gc infrastructure can work with the current MCJIT without any change (good news). I will explain what I have done to find the garbage collector metadata generated by llvm with MCJIT, I'm pretty sure that it could help someone. And it's very easy. You just have to activate a static gcprinter for the assembly. A very good example is

Hi Pedro (et al.), On 02/14/2013 11:43 PM, Pedro Artigas wrote: > I believe what is going on is that there is an issue with the way that information is deleted (the CG information). Yeap, that's exactly the problem! :-) I noticed that the GCModuleInfo::iterator (line 931 in lib/CodeGen/AsmPrinter/AsmPrinter.cpp) is empty and, thus, GCMetadataPrinter::finishAssembly is never called.

As discussed in LLVMdev [1], due to the execution order of doFinalization functions, the GC information were deleted before AsmPrinter::doFinalization was executed. Thus, the GCMetadataPrinter::finishAssembly was never called. The attached patch fixes that by moving the code of the GCInfoDeleter::doFinalization to Printer::doFinalization. Pedro (cc'ed) has already taken a look at this and he

Hello Philip, it seems like r226311 [1] introduced a bug which causes finishAssembly() to be called multiple times, even if there is only one strategy. For each function, GCModuleInfo::getFunctionInfo() adds the strategy to the StrategyList instance variable. AsmPrinter::doFinalization() calls finishAssembly() for each strategy in this list. -Manuel [1] http://reviews.llvm.org/rL226311

Hi all, In order to support linking AsmWriter separately from CodeGen, the Collector class (a CodeGen component) had to be decoupled from the AsmWriter interface. This required moving the beginAssembly and endAssembly methods to a separate abstract base class. If you had overridden these methods, your class may compile successfully but fail at runtime with a message of the form:

Hi! I have now a more precise question, I hope that this time, someone will be able to help me :) I'm now able to find the gc meta data. To find this data, I simply register a GCMetadataPrinter (just like during an AOT compilation). A GCMetadataprinter is called at the end of the compilation of a module after having assigned the slots to the live roots. I have almost everything except that

Hi all, So, MCJIT is working with vmkit, that's great. However, I need to retrieve the GCModuleInfo and the MachineCodeEmitter used during the compilation process. And I don't know how I should proceed? I'm trying to understand how they are preserved with the old jit, but I have to say that I'm a little bit lost because I haven't a global view of the code... So, any help would

Hello Yiannis, I am not an expert on metadata or the CG information but one of the two has to happen: - Simply moving the deleter pass to a different spot - Changing the doFinalization of another pass (Printer?) to do the deleter pass job (this should work now because the doFinalization order is the reverse of the doInitialization order) Option 1 is a smaller change, option 2 will make the code

Now that the statepoint changes have landed, I wanted to start a discussion about what's next for GC support in LLVM. I'm going to sketch out a strawman proposal, but I'm not set on any of this. I mostly just want to draw interested parties out of the woodwork. :) Overall Direction: In the short term, my intent is to preserve the functionality of the existing code, but migrate

Hi folks, I'm trying to compile VMKit (and eventually J3) with LLVM/Clang head. There seem to be some recent commits (starting with roughly 165505) that break the VMKit compile with the following errors: $ make ENABLE_OPTIMIZED=1 llvm[0]: Constructing LLVMBuild project information. make[1]: Entering directory `.../vmkit/lib/vmkit/StaticGCPass' llvm[1]: Compiling StaticGCPass.cpp for

Hello Yiannis, Your patch seems fine. It is option #2 which I am glad to hear solves the issue. It also removes more lines than it adds, I like patches that fix issues and have that property! Anyhow if you add some testing, as you suggest, you should be good to go. Thanks Pedro On Feb 16, 2013, at 6:13 AM, Yiannis Tsiouris <gtsiour at softlab.ntua.gr> wrote: >

Hi Dmitry, On 02/23/13 19:10, Dmitry Babokin wrote: > What's about the usage case, when LLVM is used as a library and the > user implements its custom pass, which dump the code (implemented as a > FunctionPass, but not as Printer)? Hm, I haven't thought of that... I'll take a better look and try to find a more suitable solution. Any suggestion is more than welcome! :-)

On Thu, Jun 10, 2010 at 11:34 AM, David Terei <davidterei at gmail.com> wrote: > Its good to see that a feature of this nature would be useful to a > whole range of people, I wasn't aware of that. > > On 9 June 2010 22:40, Andrew Lenharth <andrewl at lenharth.org> wrote: >> My argument amounts to express side tables as side tables in the IR >> rather than as

Yiannis, - /// clear - Resets the pass. The metadata deleter pass calls this. + /// clear - Resets the pass. The metadata printer pass calls this. I would propose different text here: /// clear - Resets the pass. Any pass, which uses GCModuleInfo(), should call it in doFinalization(). Does it make sense? -Dmitry On Wed, Feb 27, 2013 at 7:21 PM, Yiannis Tsiouris <gtsiour at