similar to: [LLVMdev] Patch: add support for -isysroot flag to llvmc

Thanks for the answers. > See http://llvm.org/docs/FAQ.html#platformindependent . If you're > dealing with C code, it isn't too hard to add a new target to clang; > send an email to cfe-dev if you need help with that. The "target > datalayout" information is purely a hint to the optimizers. My experience this far has been mainly with using llvm-gcc and llvmc,

Hi all, I've been subscribed to this list on-and-off and always found it very helpful. I'm facing the problem of compiling a project in Objective C with LLVM in a Darwin environment. There is a certain Objective C protocol that appears in two .m files, and so the corresponding l_OBJC_PROTOCOL and l_OBJC_LABEL_PROTOCOL symbols appear in both .o files. The problem is that while these

Thanks, but I'm not sure I understand. I see no such flag in clang 2.9 nor couldn't I find any mention of it. What does it do? Harel Cain On Sun, Mar 4, 2012 at 15:03, Anton Korobeynikov <anton at korobeynikov.info>wrote: > > In the good old llvmc, the -Wo flag could be used to pass arguments to > the > > optimizer. Is there a similar mechanism anywhere for clang?

Hi all, In the good old llvmc, the -Wo flag could be used to pass arguments to the optimizer. Is there a similar mechanism anywhere for clang? Is there also a similar mechanism to -Wllc? Thanks! Harel Cain -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/attachments/20120304/0e5c7267/attachment.html>

I have tried to invoke a transformation/optimization pass using -mllvm, without success. I might be missing something. For example I have a shared/dynamic library which contains LLVM passes. I used to invoke them with llvmc like this: >>*llvmc mycode.c -o mycode.o -c -opt -Wo,=-load,libFoo.dylib,-Foo* Can this style of optimization be executed using -mllvm argument? Thx, PMon On Sun,

On Thu, Oct 27, 2011 at 7:31 AM, Harel Cain <harel.cain at gmail.com> wrote: > Hi all, > > A few different though somewhat related questions here. I'm really grateful > for your answers! > > 1. From a previous question I know that sizeof's are resolved into literals > early in the front-end before IR is even emitted. It seems that they are > resolved into

Looks like a problem with llvmc. Your example works fine with clang. ~/tmp $ cat foo.c void foo() { __asm__ volatile ("push {r4}\n\t"); } gilgamesh: ~/tmp $ clang -target arm-linux-eabi -S -Os foo.c -o - .syntax unified .eabi_attribute 20, 1 .eabi_attribute 21, 1 .eabi_attribute 23, 3 .eabi_attribute 24, 1 .eabi_attribute 25, 1 .file "foo.c" .text .globl foo

Hi, I encountered an issue with inline assembly in my c files compiled with llvmc. When I have a push instruction in the inline assembly like: __asm__ volatile ( "push {r4}\n\t" ); the compiler will drop the curly braces and leave it in the generated assembly file as: push r4 And this is non-conformant with the ARM

I see now that this clearly to the problem raised elswhere, for example: http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/pipermail/llvmdev/2010-December/036764.html http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/pipermail/llvmdev/2010-November/036289.html So clearly a repeating issue on the MacOS platform. Harel On Sun, Dec 12, 2010 at 5:10 PM, Harel Cain <harel.cain at gmail.com> wrote: > Hi all, > > This is a problem

Hi Harel, Several existing passes can take command line arguments. Have a look at lib/Transforms/Scalar/LoopUnrollPass.cpp for example. Its command line arguments are defined using the cl::opt objects. Best regards, -- Arnaud de Grandmaison ________________________________ From: llvmdev-bounces at cs.uiuc.edu [mailto:llvmdev-bounces at cs.uiuc.edu] On Behalf Of Harel Cain Sent: Thursday, January

On 03/04/2012 02:32 PM, Harel Cain wrote: > Thanks, but I'm not sure I understand. I see no such flag in clang 2.9 > nor couldn't I find any mention of it. What does it do? It's called -mllvm. You can use it like this. clang -mllvm -vectorize ... Cheers Tobi

Hi all, A few different though somewhat related questions here. I'm really grateful for your answers! 1. From a previous question I know that sizeof's are resolved into literals early in the front-end before IR is even emitted. It seems that they are resolved into whatever value is correct for the host machine. But if one wishes to then take the IR and emit assembly code for some other

Hi, I am trying to build my own llvmc plugin, but somehow, the llvm makefiles do not pick up the plugin in the llvmc/plugins directory anymore in a recent (r129445) svn checkout. According to the tutorial (http://llvm.org/docs/CompilerDriverTutorial.html): $ cd tools/llvmc $ cp -r example/Simple plugins/Simple $ make LLVMC_BASED_DRIVER_NAME=mygcc LLVMC_BUILTIN_PLUGINS=Simple does not build

A follow-up question: Is there a way to make different passes accept one command line option that will affect all of them? For example, I'd like to have a -optStrength parameter, that can be given to all of my passes simultaneously. Thanks a lot, Guy Arnaud Allard de Grandmaison wrote: > > Hi Harel, > > Several existing passes can take command line arguments. Have a look at

You could make the cl:opt object visible outside one of your passes, and use it in your other passes : in other words, it is a global variable shared between several files. Best regards, -- Arnaud de Grandmaison -----Original Message----- From: llvmdev-bounces at cs.uiuc.edu [mailto:llvmdev-bounces at cs.uiuc.edu] On Behalf Of guyadini Sent: Thursday, January 27, 2011 12:38 PM To: llvmdev at

The llvm compiler can now generated movt/movw instructions to create 32-bit constants. Those new instructions use new relocations. Mach-o uses different numbering for relocations than ELF does. For mach-o, ARM_RELOC_PAIR=1 and ARM_RELOC_HALF=8. You need a newer linker that understands the new relocations. -Nick On Feb 20, 2012, at 5:20 AM, Harel Cain wrote: > Hi all, > > I'm

Mikhail Glushenkov wrote: > Hi Sanjiv, > > 2009/6/15 Sanjiv Gupta <sanjiv.gupta at microchip.com>: > >> Hi Mikhail, >> How do you build mcc16 executable? >> > > This should work: > > $ cd $LLVM_DIR/tools/llvmc/examples/mcc16 > $ make > > I configure llvm into a separate directory from source. When I do the steps you mentioned in

According to the FAQ llvmc is considered experimental/unsupported. But FWIW, here's an issue I found while trying to use it on 32 bit x86 systems. tools/llvmc/plugins/Base/Base.td hardcodes the -relocation-model=pic option into invocations of llc: def llc : Tool< [(in_language "llvm-bitcode"), (out_language "assembler"), (output_suffix "s"), (cmd_line

Hi When I'm using clang 3.1 with the isysroot argument, it doesn't seem to pick up header files from the directory I'm passing through the command line: > $ clang -isysroot/myownheaders -v foo.c -c -o foo.o > clang version 3.1 (tags/RELEASE_31/final) > Target: i386-pc-linux-gnu > Thread model: posix > "/usr/bin/clang" -cc1 -triple i386-pc-linux-gnu -emit-obj

Without this patch, opt is never called for llvm-assembly (.ll) files when "-opt" is passed to llvmc: $ llvmc -clang -v test.ll llc -f -O2 test.ll -o /tmp/llvm_gvO2nK/test.s as /tmp/llvm_gvO2nK/test.s -o /tmp/llvm_gvO2nK/test.o llvm-ld -native -disable-internalize /tmp/llvm_gvO2nK/test.o -o a.out $ llvmc -clang -opt -v test.ll llc -f -O2 test.ll -o /tmp/llvm_2xiL86/test.s as