similar to: [LLVMdev] Recommended GCC version for ARM/Linux platform for LLVM compilation.

On 26 June 2011 10:16, Karel Gardas <karel.gardas at centrum.cz> wrote: > So I'm curious what's *the* recommended compiler on this platform which > LLVM development is using? Hi Karel, I'm not sure what test cases you're talking about, but we use CodeSourcery's GCC and binutils (latests, not stable, because of new core support) and it works a treat. You can

Hello, I asked here for kind of reference GCC version which LLVM development team is using for *native* testing on ARM hardware. (no cross compilation!) last week or so. I've been curious myself how the situation looks and so I tested LLVM 2.9 as a reference point and LLVM HEAD as of June 29 on ARMv7 (two boards with two different Ubuntu versions) compiled by GCC 4.3.4, 4.4.1, 4.4.5,

On 06/27/11 12:46 PM, Renato Golin wrote: > On 26 June 2011 10:16, Karel Gardas<karel.gardas at centrum.cz> wrote: >> So I'm curious what's *the* recommended compiler on this platform which >> LLVM development is using? > > Hi Karel, > > I'm not sure what test cases you're talking about, but we use > CodeSourcery's GCC and binutils (latests,

Hi Renato, On 07/ 5/11 12:20 PM, Renato Golin wrote: > On 3 July 2011 21:32, Karel Gardas<karel.gardas at centrum.cz> wrote: >> please see http://ghcarm.wordpress.com/2011/07/03/llvm-on-arm-testing/ >> >> Is there anything other I might do for you to get those regressions fixed? > > Hi Karel, > > This is great! > > I can see there's only a handful

On 3 July 2011 21:32, Karel Gardas <karel.gardas at centrum.cz> wrote: > please see http://ghcarm.wordpress.com/2011/07/03/llvm-on-arm-testing/ > > Is there anything other I might do for you to get those regressions fixed? Hi Karel, This is great! I can see there's only a handful of errors. All JIT errors seem to be the same (MC). All O2 errors, too (MIPS). The select.ll

On 07/ 4/11 01:39 AM, Eli Friedman wrote: > For the JIT failures, it would be nice if you could track down the SVN > revision when it started failing. (We have an ARM buildbot at > http://google1.osuosl.org:8011/builders/clang-native-arm-cortex-a9 , > but the JIT was already broken when it was set up.) I've used my i.MX53 board to get this, but I'm returning it today back to

On Sun, Jul 3, 2011 at 1:32 PM, Karel Gardas <karel.gardas at centrum.cz> wrote: > Hello, > > I asked here for kind of reference GCC version which LLVM development > team is using for *native* testing on ARM hardware. (no cross > compilation!) last week or so. I've been curious myself how the > situation looks and so I tested LLVM 2.9 as a reference point and LLVM >

On Fri, Jul 8, 2011 at 1:13 AM, Karel Gardas <karel.gardas at centrum.cz> wrote: > On 07/ 4/11 01:39 AM, Eli Friedman wrote: >> >> For the JIT failures, it would be nice if you could track down the SVN >> revision when it started failing.  (We have an ARM buildbot at >> http://google1.osuosl.org:8011/builders/clang-native-arm-cortex-a9 , >> but the JIT was

On Sun, Jul 3, 2011 at 11:32 PM, Karel Gardas <karel.gardas at centrum.cz> wrote: > Hello, > > I asked here for kind of reference GCC version which LLVM development > team is using for *native* testing on ARM hardware. (no cross > compilation!) last week or so. I've been curious myself how the > situation looks and so I tested LLVM 2.9 as a reference point and LLVM >

On 06/24/11 06:53 PM, Eli Friedman wrote: > On Fri, Jun 24, 2011 at 9:12 AM, Karel Gardas<karel.gardas at centrum.cz> wrote: >> My question is if it is a known bug or unknown in which case where to >> report it and if also include compiled *.bc file or not. > > Haven't seen it before... see > http://llvm.org/docs/HowToSubmitABug.html , and please do include the

On 08/ 1/12 05:14 AM, Marshall Clow wrote: > Anyone know the status of this patch? > Did it get applied? Rejected? Ok'ed but not applied? Hello, as far as I know, it's not presented in today's HEAD. Thanks, Karel

Hi Tim, On 01/ 8/14 10:24 PM, Tim Northover wrote: > Hi Karel, > >> I've observed the same issue with LLVM 3.4 as distributed by Ubuntu 13.10 >> and with LLVM HEAD compiled on January 6. I'm able to provide the byte-code >> file which results in this issue, but would first like to know if this is a >> known issue in AArch64 target support or if I shall submit

All, I would like to submit the attached patch, which allows the GHC (Glasgow Haskell Compiler) calling convention to work on ARM targets. Could some nice person please review this code, so I can move towards getting it committed? I have thoroughly tested this patch again GHC on a Debian-ARM (armel) system. Unfortunately my understanding of LLVM is limited, so it's likely I'm not

On 1 August 2012 09:17, Karel Gardas <karel.gardas at centrum.cz> wrote: > as far as I know, it's not presented in today's HEAD. If you want it applied, you have to send it to llvm-commits, not here. If you sent it there already, ping the thread that people will respond. -- cheers, --renato http://systemcall.org/

Hi Renato, On 06/25/12 12:13 AM, Renato Golin wrote: > Hi Karel, > > I understand this patch has already been merged (to 3.0), so don't > take my question as stopping the merge to head, I'm just making sure I > got it right... The rest looks correct. > > + CCIfType<[v2f64], CCAssignToReg<[Q4, Q5]>>, > + CCIfType<[f64], CCAssignToReg<[D8, D9,

Hello, I'm trying to convince llc to compile into thumb2 ISA on ARMv7. I'm using: -march=thumb -mattr=v7,thumb2,vfp3 but llc complains about this with: llc: error: invalid target 'thumb -mattr=v7,thumb2,vfp3' I'm using LLVM from Aug 29 2011. To me the set of options looks sane so I'd like to ask what's wrong with this. Thanks! Karel

Hello, it looks like I do have infinite loop in llc on linux/armv7 platform somewhere in llvm::SmallVectorImpl. Two backtraces obtained with 10 seconds delay are: 0x0099be14 in llvm::SmallVectorTemplateCommon<llvm::SDNode*>::setEnd (this=0x7ee90b38, P=0x5c06988) at /export/home/karel/vcs/llvm-head/include/llvm/ADT/SmallVector.h:103 103 void setEnd(T *P) { this->EndX = P; }

Hi Steve, I'm not an LLVM developer but am the author/maintainer of the LLVM backend in GHC. The patch looks mostly good to me (although I am not that familiar with ARM so could easily have missed something). My main concern is why are you avoiding using the R0 - R3 registers? Also, could you please update me on the status of this work. I assume you are getting GHC running in registerised

On Fri, Jun 24, 2011 at 9:12 AM, Karel Gardas <karel.gardas at centrum.cz> wrote: > Hello, > > it looks like I do have infinite loop in llc on linux/armv7 platform > somewhere in llvm::SmallVectorImpl. Two backtraces obtained with 10 > seconds delay are: > > 0x0099be14 in llvm::SmallVectorTemplateCommon<llvm::SDNode*>::setEnd > (this=0x7ee90b38, P=0x5c06988)

On 29 June 2012 17:46, Karel Gardas <karel.gardas at centrum.cz> wrote: > Yes and no. Shortly: original GHC/ARM/LLVM port was done by Stephen on > ARMv5/Qemu IIRC. I've later added whole VFP support and ARMv7 support. The > code in GHC is properly #ifdefed, so if there is no VFP available on pre > ARMv6, then it's not used. ie. GHC STG floating points regs are then >