similar to: [LLVMdev] Compiling whole programs to bitcode

On Sat, Jun 4, 2011 at 5:21 AM, Charles Davis <cdavis at mymail.mines.edu> wrote: > You can link your bitcode together with glibc's bitcode by using the > llvm-link utility. Then you can run DCE over the bitcode with "opt -dce" > and cull all the functions you don't need. Right, that's still a reasonably straightforward solution for C... I think what I'm

On 6/3/11 10:12 PM, Russell Wallace wrote: > With Clang, it's reasonably straightforward to compile a C/C++ file to bitcode. > > Is there a way to compile a program together with all the standard > library functions it uses, to that format? That is, suppose you have > hello.c that calls printf, how would you go about generating the > bitcode representation of both the main

Russell Wallace wrote: > On Sat, Jun 4, 2011 at 5:21 AM, Charles Davis<cdavis at mymail.mines.edu> wrote: >> You can link your bitcode together with glibc's bitcode by using the >> llvm-link utility. Then you can run DCE over the bitcode with "opt -dce" >> and cull all the functions you don't need. > > Right, that's still a reasonably

On 6/3/11 10:43 PM, Russell Wallace wrote: > On Sat, Jun 4, 2011 at 5:39 AM, Nick Lewycky <nicholas at mxc.ca> wrote: >> If a program uses a templated function from a C++ library, either the C++ >> library provides an implementation of the template instantiated to that >> type, or else the whole implementation was available in the header and ends >> up in the TU of

On Sat, Jun 4, 2011 at 5:39 AM, Nick Lewycky <nicholas at mxc.ca> wrote: > If a program uses a templated function from a C++ library, either the C++ > library provides an implementation of the template instantiated to that > type, or else the whole implementation was available in the header and ends > up in the TU of the program, not the library ((or else you'd get a link

On 4/16/10 12:17 AM, Nick Lewycky wrote: > Pranav Garg wrote: >> Hi, >> >> I am generating the .bc file using the following command >> >> $ llvm-gcc -emit-llvm -S -o pointer.bc ../../../test/pointer.c >> >> But when I run any pass using opt it gives the following error : >> $ ./opt -basicaa pointer.bc >> ./opt: Bitcode stream should be a

On Jun 3, 2011, at 9:27 PM, Russell Wallace wrote: > only having to write a parser for the ASCII version of bitcode > (dead easy) Don't do this. Seriously. Waste of time. There's a parser in llvm, it's pretty good at reading and writing bitcode. Just do your analysis using the llvm apis. -eric

Here's the other of my proposals for this year's Google Summer of Code. (The first is on cfe-dev.) It was suggested to me by Dan Kegel (from the Wine project, they really want this). Title: Microsoft Direct3D shader bytecode backend Abstract: There is a distinct lack of open-source frameworks for compiling HLSL, the shader language used by Direct3D, into bytecode that D3D can

In the case I posted I had removed that line, however, you still get the __3F_ in the generated assembly with it. Sent from my iPhone On Nov 25, 2011, at 2:15 PM, Charles Davis <cdavis at mymail.mines.edu> wrote: > > On Nov 25, 2011, at 8:39 AM, Michael Spencer wrote: > >> So I was taking a look at Microsoft C++ ABI support while on vacation, >> and ran into a major

Hi all, I'm trying to generate whole program bitcode files for linux kernel and do interprocedural analysis on kernel. I use llvmlinux to compile kernel with clang and generate a bunch of bitcode files successfully. I need to link all these bitcode files together into a single bitcode file, so that I can run whole program analysis. Can I use llvm-link to achieve this? Or should I use

On Nov 25, 2011, at 2:22 PM, bigcheesegs at gmail.com wrote: > In the case I posted I had removed that line, however, you still get the __3F_ in the generated assembly with it. Huh. It only seems to happen with a Windows triple or a Linux triple. Doesn't happen with a Mac triple, though--probably because the Darwin assembler supports quoted symbols (i.e. you can enclose an identifier in

Le 21 juin 2012 à 11:34, Manuel Klimek a écrit : > On Thu, Jun 21, 2012 at 10:43 AM, Charles Davis <cdavis at mymail.mines.edu> wrote: > > On Jun 20, 2012, at 6:19 PM, Chandler Carruth wrote: > >> On Wed, Jun 20, 2012 at 5:13 PM, Nick Lewycky <nlewycky at google.com> wrote: >> Is there anybody who is certain that our autoconf dependency needs to stay around?

On Jun 20, 2012, at 6:19 PM, Chandler Carruth wrote: > On Wed, Jun 20, 2012 at 5:13 PM, Nick Lewycky <nlewycky at google.com> wrote: > Is there anybody who is certain that our autoconf dependency needs to stay around? Are there developers stuck on systems that don't have a recent enough cmake in their most recent release, or maybe are using some features from configure+make that

On Mon, Mar 28, 2011 at 9:22 PM, Charles Davis <cdavis at mymail.mines.edu>wrote: > Here's the other of my proposals for this year's Google Summer of Code. > (The first is on cfe-dev.) It was suggested to me by Dan Kegel (from the > Wine project, they really want this). > > Title: Microsoft Direct3D shader bytecode backend > > Abstract: > > There is a

Here's my SoC 2010 proposal. I submitted it a long time ago (last week, to be precise), but didn't post it to the list. You can review it here: http://socghop.appspot.com/gsoc/student_proposal/show/google/gsoc2010/cdavis/t127000394358 Chip

Hi Terence, I believe that this is in fact similar to an approach Coverity uses (or used at one time) as a robust solution to determine what was done during a build. I can imagine that one can build a robust system following this technique, but it also seems like it might be quite a bit of work. Another possible alternative not mentioned is to teach the compiler driver (clang, most likely) to

On 3/29/11 5:14 AM, Justin Holewinski wrote: > On Mon, Mar 28, 2011 at 9:22 PM, Charles Davis <cdavis at mymail.mines.edu > <mailto:cdavis at mymail.mines.edu>> wrote: > > Here's the other of my proposals for this year's Google Summer of Code. > (The first is on cfe-dev.) It was suggested to me by Dan Kegel (from the > Wine project, they really

Hi, Kelly, Have you found the solution for this problem? I met a similar problem when I were trying to test MySQL 5.0 with LLVM. The following is my step, but still failed since llvm-ld can not recognize some gcc link flags. 1. during the configuration, use a script such as llvm-gcc.sh, at this time the script only invoke the gcc. This is necessary because the gnu configure will test the

Hi all, I'm trying to generate whole program bitcode files for linux kernel and do interprocedural analysis on kernel. I use llvmlinux to compile kernel with clang and generate a bunch of bitcode files successfully. I need to link all these bitcode files together into a single bitcode file, so that I can run whole program analysis. Should I use libLTO to link all these bitcode files

Hi, Professor Adve suggested that we post this question to llvm-dev. Thanks in advance for your advice. My colleagues and I want to create whole-program bitcode for large real programs like Apache, BIND, OpenLDAP, etc. We want the whole-program bitcode to include every part of the program for which we have source code. For example, in the case of Apache's "httpd" server, we want