similar to: [LLVMdev] Make "llvmc -opt" call "opt" for .ll files

Displaying 20 results from an estimated 200 matches similar to: "[LLVMdev] Make "llvmc -opt" call "opt" for .ll files"

2011 Feb 15
0
[LLVMdev] Make "llvmc -opt" call "opt" for .ll files
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
2013 Jan 14
0
[LLVMdev] [cfe-dev] RFC: Codifying (but not formalizing) the optimization levels in LLVM and Clang
Chandler Carruth <chandlerc at gmail.com> writes: > minsizeopt > sizeopt > quickopt > opt > maxopt I prefer being consistent and putting "opt" at the end. I would still like something other than "opt" for the fourth one. "opt" seems too generic given the other levels. -David
2013 Jan 14
1
[LLVMdev] [cfe-dev] RFC: Codifying (but not formalizing) the optimization levels in LLVM and Clang
On Mon, Jan 14, 2013 at 1:30 PM, <dag at cray.com> wrote: > Chandler Carruth <chandlerc at gmail.com> writes: > > > minsizeopt > > sizeopt > > quickopt > > opt > > maxopt > > I prefer being consistent and putting "opt" at the end. > > I would still like something other than "opt" for the fourth one. "opt"
2015 Oct 01
3
Fwd: buildbot failure in LLVM on sanitizer-x86_64-linux-bootstrap
This buildbot seems to have been failing for a while (though it's hard for me to identify the root cause in the logs, as I mentioned in another thread, so it's hard to say if it's the same failure, or if the failure is consistent, etc) - anyone watching it/caring aobut it? ---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: <llvm.buildmaster at lab.llvm.org> Date: Wed, Sep 30, 2015 at
2011 Oct 31
1
[LLVMdev] git web interface
Hello Everyone We're looking right now for web interface to git mirrors of main LLVM repo. What should be used? Gitweb? cgit? Gitalist? If you have some success stories to share - please let us know. If possible, we'd prefer something perl'ish or python'ish :) Thanks! -- With best regards, Anton Korobeynikov Faculty of Mathematics and Mechanics, Saint Petersburg State
2013 Jan 14
4
[LLVMdev] [cfe-dev] RFC: Codifying (but not formalizing) the optimization levels in LLVM and Clang
On Mon, Jan 14, 2013 at 4:46 AM, Justin Holewinski < justin.holewinski at gmail.com> wrote: > If I understand the attributes correctly, they would be function-level > attributes applied to IR functions, correct? I'm curious what the > semantics would be for cross-function optimization. For example, consider > a function "foo" defined with maxopt and a function
2013 Jan 14
0
[LLVMdev] [cfe-dev] RFC: Codifying (but not formalizing) the optimization levels in LLVM and Clang
On Mon, Jan 14, 2013 at 1:46 PM, Kaelyn Uhrain <rikka at google.com> wrote: > On Mon, Jan 14, 2013 at 1:30 PM, <dag at cray.com> wrote: > >> Chandler Carruth <chandlerc at gmail.com> writes: >> >> > minsizeopt >> > sizeopt >> > quickopt >> > opt >> > maxopt >> >> I prefer being consistent and putting
2005 Apr 21
1
[LLVMdev] where is the project file (.vcproj) of llvmc?
Can the driver (llvmc) be built on win32?
2006 Aug 17
0
[LLVMdev] Problem with stock llvmc configuration for C
Bram Adams wrote: > Hi, > > Op 14-aug-06, om 09:29 heeft Reid Spencer het volgende geschreven: > >> >>> Apparently, %llvmgccdir% and %llvmcc1% are not recognized as a useful >>> variable by the llvmc configuration parser. >> >> >> Actually, they are. See tools/llvmc/ConfigurationDriver.cpp around line >> 304. Also, they are recognized
2006 Aug 17
2
[LLVMdev] Problem with stock llvmc configuration for C
On Thu, 2006-08-17 at 08:55 -0700, Scott Michel wrote: > Regarding llvmc there is one small problem: with the gcc 4.0 frontend, > "-emit-llvm" needs to be added to all of the translator.command lines. > Not entirely sure how to conditionalize that in the configuration files. Hi Scott, What is needed is a complete overhaul of the configuration mechanism. We have plans to
2006 Aug 17
0
[LLVMdev] Problem with stock llvmc configuration for C
Reid Spencer wrote: > On Thu, 2006-08-17 at 08:55 -0700, Scott Michel wrote: > >>Regarding llvmc there is one small problem: with the gcc 4.0 frontend, >>"-emit-llvm" needs to be added to all of the translator.command lines. >>Not entirely sure how to conditionalize that in the configuration files. > > > Hi Scott, > > What is needed is a
2007 May 28
1
[LLVMdev] Usage of llvmc
Hello, guys. I've tried to use llvmc to test optimization options but wasn't successful. Would you mind telling me what's wrong with this? ------------------------------------------------------------- $ llvmc chc_03.c -O3 -o chc_03 terminate called after throwing an instance of 'std::string' llvmc((anonymous namespace)::PrintStackTrace()+0x15)[0x8086091]
2007 May 28
0
[LLVMdev] Usage of llvmc (Sorry. Please disregard the right above.)
Thank you so much for your reply, Chris. If so, can I ask you two things more? First, is there any way to have various optimizations on LLVM assembly such as -O options in llvmc? llvm-gcc doesn't seem to be working for these -O options... Second, I'm still not sure about difference between *.s and *.ll. LLVM assembly *.s file can be made from llvm-gcc with -S option. Another
2007 Oct 22
2
[LLVMdev] Q: missing -fPIC in llvmc?
Hello All, On a Debian/AMD64 host I am surprised that there is apparently no way to generate position independent code in shared object (i.e. to output files which are easy dlopen-able without pain)? I probably missed something obvious, but what? I want to compile LLVM assembly source code -suitably generated- into .so as directly as possible... Regards -- Basile STARYNKEVITCH
2007 Oct 22
0
[LLVMdev] Q: missing -fPIC in llvmc?
On Mon, 22 Oct 2007, Basile STARYNKEVITCH wrote: > On a Debian/AMD64 host I am surprised that there is apparently no way to > generate position independent code in shared object (i.e. to output > files which are easy dlopen-able without pain)? > > I probably missed something obvious, but what? You're missing the fact that llvmc is highly experimental, and is not really usable
2008 Nov 25
2
[LLVMdev] s/llvmc2/llvmc/
Hello, Since the old llvmc was removed, is it now OK to rename llvmc2 to llvmc? I'll update man pages accordingly.
2008 Nov 25
0
[LLVMdev] s/llvmc2/llvmc/
On Nov 25, 2008, at 9:11 AM, Mikhail Glushenkov wrote: > Hello, > > Since the old llvmc was removed, is it now OK to rename llvmc2 to > llvmc? > I'll update man pages accordingly. yes please! -Chris
2008 Dec 09
0
[LLVMdev] llvmc now supports Clang
Greetings everybody! In my quest to attract more users to llvmc, I've added support for compilation via the Clang front-end (previously, only llvm-gcc was supported). This is enabled with the '-clang' switch; basically, you can now just alias 'ccc' to 'llvmc -clang' and get the same functionality. Examples: Compile via Clang: $ llvmc -clang test.c
2009 Mar 31
0
[LLVMdev] llvmc issues on x86_32
Hi, > 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. I am the primary maintainer of llvmc. First of all, thanks for your bug report. > tools/llvmc/plugins/Base/Base.td hardcodes the -relocation-model=pic > option into invocations of llc: This part was copied verbatim from the
2009 Apr 01
2
[LLVMdev] llvmc issues on x86_32
Mikhail Glushenkov wrote: > I removed the '-relocation-model' bit from the default invocation > string for llc. To pass arguments to llc, use the new "-Wllc" > option. I'd say that this is the proper solution, even though it breaks backward compatibility on x86_64. But given that llvmc is still considered experimental, better do it now than later. ;-) Thanks a lot