similar to: [LLVMdev] Passing structures as pointers, MSVC x64 style

Carl, See clang/lib/CodeGen/TargetInfo.cpp. // FIXME: mingw64-gcc emits 128-bit struct as i128 if (Size <= 128 && (Size & (Size - 1)) == 0) return ABIArgInfo::getDirect(llvm::IntegerType::get(getVMContext(), Size)); It was my workaround, sorry. Please check to tweak the clause (128 to 64) and lemme

The attached .ll files seem equivalent, but the resulting asm from 'opt-fail.ll' causes a crash to webkit. I suspect the usage of registers is wrong, can someone take a look ? $ llc opt-pass.ll -o - .section __TEXT,__text,regular,pure_instructions .globl __ZN7WebCore6kolos1ERiS0_PKNS_20RenderBoxModelObjectEPNS_10StyleImageE .align 4, 0x90

On Sep 1, 2010, at 6:25 AM, Argyrios Kyrtzidis wrote: > The attached .ll files seem equivalent, but the resulting asm from 'opt-fail.ll' causes a crash to webkit. > I suspect the usage of registers is wrong, can someone take a look ? The difference is that there is a shift right after the multiply, before the divide. In IR, the difference is: %5 = mul nsw i32 %4, %tmp1

Hi sorta piggybacking on the other thread. I am looking for some feedback on how to implement the following idea in llvm. The really short version of the idea is this: * I want to alloca a field (record/struct), so that its size is an even multiple of 64 bytes. [^1] * This allocaed field will be exclusively used as an argument to functions * llvm should be aware of the extra bytes and should

Hi Devs, consider below testcase $cat test.cpp constexpr int product() { return 10*20; } int main() { const int x = product(); return 0; } $./clang test.cpp -std=c++11 -S $./clang -v clang version 9.0.0 Target: x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu $cat test.s main: .cfi_startproc # %bb.0: pushq %rbp .cfi_def_cfa_offset 16 .cfi_offset %rbp, -16 movq

When I try running one llvm function in JIT without optimization I get SEGV. Looking at assembly (below) I see that the local value 0xffffffffffffffe0(%rbp) is used without being ever initialized (see my comment in asm). Same code on i386 works fine, with and w/out optimization. My guess is that this is a bug in LLVM. Yuri --- llvm --- %struct.mystruct = type { i32, i8, i8, i8, i8 } define

Hi, I've attached 2 .ll files which are supposed to be equivalent but 'unopt-fail.ll' causes a crash in webkit's test suite while 'unopt-pass.ll' does not. I can't give more details about the crash, when I run the crashing test it in isolation it passes, when I run the full suite it crashes; it boggles the mind. Below I provide the optimized asm that is produced from

Sorry I missed that important detail. The relevant part of the command line is: -cc1 -S -triple i386-pc-win32 I don't expect it matters if it's for Windows or Linux in this case. On Fri, Sep 14, 2018 at 9:16 PM David Blaikie <dblaikie at gmail.com> wrote: > Can't say I've observed that behavior (though I'm just building from > top-of-tree rather than 6.0,

Using MM registers is wrong unless the user has specifically asked for it, which doesn't seem to be the case here. In the awesome MMX architecture, touching an MM register makes subsequent x87 operations fail unless an EMMS instruction is issued first; none of the compilers here are smart enough to insert EMMS instructions in the right places, so the only safe thing is not to use

Here's the optimized versions: $ opt -std-compile-opts unopt-pass.ll -o - | llvm-dis -o - [...] define %3 @_ZN7WebCore15GraphicsContext19roundToDevicePixelsERKNS_9FloatRectE(%"class.WebCore::GraphicsContext"* %this, %"struct.WebCore::FloatRect"* %rect) nounwind ssp align 2 { %roundedOrigin = alloca %"class.WebCore::FloatSize", align 4 ;

On Jan 2, 2009, at 2:29 PM, Jon Harrop wrote: >>> I don't think you would want to build discriminated unions on top of >>> C-style unions though. >> >> Why? > > Uniformity when nesting and space efficiency. Users of a language > front-end > will want to nest discriminated unions, e.g. to manipulate trees. Okay, so you're just talking about boxed

John, I'm still not sure what you're talking about, I have included the assembly output from two compilations, one with a user explicit catch-all, one with only an implicit cleanup, the DWARF Action Table and Types Table are absolutely identical, as are the indexes used to reference the Action Table from the region maps. -Peter Lawrence.

This set of patches converts the way frames gets created from using PUSHes/POPs to using MOVes, thus allowing (in certain cases) to avoid saving/restoring part of the register set. While the place where the (small) win from this comes from varies between CPUs, the net effect is a 1 to 2% reduction on a combined interruption entry and exit when the full state save can be avoided. 1: use MOV

2010/1/22 Duncan Sands <baldrick at free.fr> > Hi James, > > > I've been trying to get a minimal test function to work, which simply >> invokes _Unwind_RaiseException with a single clean-up landing pad. However. >> when I run it my personality function is not getting called - >> _Unwind_RaiseException simply returns apparently doing nothing. Looking at

Hi James, > I've been trying to get a minimal test function to work, which simply > invokes _Unwind_RaiseException with a single clean-up landing pad. > However. when I run it my personality function is not getting called - > _Unwind_RaiseException simply returns apparently doing nothing. Looking > at the x86-64 assembly output from llc, I can see this is happening >

Hi LLVM and GCC developers, My sincere thanks will goto: * Duncan, the core developer of llvm-gcc and dragonegg http://llvm.org/devmtg/2009-10/Sands_LLVMGCCPlugin.pdf * David, the innovator and developer of GCC https://dmalcolm.fedorapeople.org/gcc/global-state/requirements.html and others who give me kind response for teaching me patiently and carefully about how to migrate GCC v4.8.x to

Hallo! I use a custom calling convention in which the first 4 arguments are promoted to registers and the rest to the stack, and the callee is responsible for popping the stack arguments. So when calling a function with 5 arguments i get this code: movq ARG_5, (%rsp) callq fun_foo_1 .Ltmp4: subq $8, %rsp I use a garbage collector with postcall safe points (.Ltmp4 is

Hi There, I am currently exploring C++ JIT-compilation for a project where this would be very useful. I started with the code from the lli tool which uses OrcLazyJIT and changed it, such that the module is being compiled from c++ source in memory and OrcLazyJIT is used exclusively. Now since I am on windows, I found that my application is crashing when trying to run the main function from the

Hi David, This is really cool. I'd love to get this in-tree. There are two ways we could go about this: (1) Make the OrcArchitecture interface ABI-aware so that it can choose the right resolver code, or (2) Replace the OrcArchitecture classes with OrcABI classes. I.e. We'd just a rename OrcX86_64 -> Orc_X86_64_SysV (and rename I386 & AArch64 similarly) , then we add your code as

On Sunday 04 January 2009 01:25:05 Chris Lattner wrote: > On Jan 2, 2009, at 2:29 PM, Jon Harrop wrote: > >>> I don't think you would want to build discriminated unions on top of > >>> C-style unions though. > >> > >> Why? > > > > Uniformity when nesting and space efficiency. Users of a language > > front-end > > will want to