similar to: [LLVMdev] Need advice on fixing my static roots pass

Hi all, I've been looking through the documentation (http://llvm.org/docs/GarbageCollection.html) on how to implement a garbage collector for LLVM and there's a couple of things that I don't quite understand. Specifically, it says that when a stack variable goes out of scope, you're supposed to assign a null value to it to indicate that the value is no longer live. What I

Forgive my top post but I hate Windows. J I am surprised you (Talin) say that "we know conservative collectors work" because my experience has very much been of them not working. Indeed, if you have 400Mb of allocated heap blocks on a 32-bit machine is there not a 10% chance of *each* random 32-bit int "pointing" into your heap, i.e. a false positive? I just did a simple

Sure. I think we can change the GC lowering pass to recognize all llvm.gcroot (not only the ones in the first block), and move them to the first block so that they are initialized by the pass later on. On Sat, Oct 2, 2010 at 10:58 PM, Talin <viridia at gmail.com> wrote: > On Sat, Oct 2, 2010 at 12:59 PM, nicolas geoffray < > nicolas.geoffray at gmail.com> wrote: > >>

On Sat, Oct 2, 2010 at 12:59 PM, nicolas geoffray < nicolas.geoffray at gmail.com> wrote: > Hi Talin, > > You are not doing something wrong, it is just that the LLVM optimizers > consider llvm.gcroot like a regular function call. The alloca is moved in > the first block most probably because the inliner anticipates another > optimization pass (the mem2reg). > OK, well,

I'm still putting the final touches on my stack crawler, and I've run into a problem having to do with function inlining and local stack roots. As you know, all local roots must be initialized before you can make any call to a function which might crawl the stack. My compiler ensures that all local variables of a function are allocated, declared as root, and initialized in the first

Hi Talin, You are not doing something wrong, it is just that the LLVM optimizers consider llvm.gcroot like a regular function call. The alloca is moved in the first block most probably because the inliner anticipates another optimization pass (the mem2reg). Cheers, Nicolas On Sat, Oct 2, 2010 at 8:28 PM, Talin <viridia at gmail.com> wrote: > I'm still putting the final touches on

Hi Talin, On Sep 2, 2007, at 04:54, Talin wrote: > I've been looking through the documentation (http://llvm.org/docs/ > GarbageCollection.html) on how to implement a garbage collector for > LLVM and there's a couple of things that I don't quite understand. > Specifically, it says that when a stack variable goes out of scope, > you're supposed to assign a

On 2007-09-03, at 23:14, Talin wrote: > On Sep 2, 2007 5:31 AM, Gordon Henriksen <gordonhenriksen at mac.com> > wrote: > >> On Sep 2, 2007, at 04:54, Talin wrote: >> >>> I've been looking through the documentation (http://llvm.org/docs/ >>> GarbageCollection.html) on how to implement a garbage collector >>> for LLVM and there's a

On Wed, Sep 22, 2010 at 5:58 AM, Kenneth Uildriks <kennethuil at gmail.com>wrote: > On Tue, Sep 21, 2010 at 8:20 PM, Talin <viridia at gmail.com> wrote: > > On Mon, Sep 20, 2010 at 3:16 PM, Talin <viridia at gmail.com> wrote: > >> > >> So I've managed to get my stack crawler working and passing its unit > tests > >> - this is the one

On Sep 2, 2007 5:31 AM, Gordon Henriksen <gordonhenriksen at mac.com> wrote: > Hi Talin, > > On Sep 2, 2007, at 04:54, Talin wrote: > > > I've been looking through the documentation (http://llvm.org/docs/ > > GarbageCollection.html) on how to implement a garbage collector for > > LLVM and there's a couple of things that I don't quite understand. >

On Mon, Sep 20, 2010 at 3:16 PM, Talin <viridia at gmail.com> wrote: > So I've managed to get my stack crawler working and passing its unit tests > - this is the one I've been working on as an alternative to shadow-stack: it > uses only static constant data structures (no global variables or > thread-local data), which means that it's fully compatible with a >

Gordon Henriksen wrote: > The intrinsics are entirely neutral to collector implementation, and > thus to threading. They could easily be used to implement reference > counting, for instance, which may or may not be implemented in a > threadsafe manner. However, as with your algorithm, reference counting > does not require code generator support, and so would not justify the

On Tue, Sep 21, 2010 at 8:20 PM, Talin <viridia at gmail.com> wrote: > On Mon, Sep 20, 2010 at 3:16 PM, Talin <viridia at gmail.com> wrote: >> >> So I've managed to get my stack crawler working and passing its unit tests >> - this is the one I've been working on as an alternative to shadow-stack: it >> uses only static constant data structures (no

So I've managed to get my stack crawler working and passing its unit tests - this is the one I've been working on as an alternative to shadow-stack: it uses only static constant data structures (no global variables or thread-local data), which means that it's fully compatible with a multi-threaded environment. One question that has arisen, however, is what to do about function

On Oct 6, 2011, at 17:19, Yiannis Tsiouris wrote: > Hello all, > > I set: InitRoots = true; in my gc plugin as i want the roots to be > initialized to the "null" value. > Is there a way to define which value should be the initial one? For > example, i would like to initialize my roots to -5 (tagged, null value > for the GC in my runtime system) instead of 0. >

Hello all, I set: InitRoots = true; in my gc plugin as i want the roots to be initialized to the "null" value. Is there a way to define which value should be the initial one? For example, i would like to initialize my roots to -5 (tagged, null value for the GC in my runtime system) instead of 0. Ofcourse, i could do it in the frontend (storing -5 to all GC roots), but i was wondering

Is there a way to find all roots of a polynomial equation? Lets say x^5+a*x^4+b*x^3+c*x^2+d*x+e=0 how to find its all roots? [[alternative HTML version deleted]]

On 30 Dec 2012, at 01:54, Talin wrote: > I completely agree with your point about wanting to be able to attach GC metadata to a type (rather than attaching it to a value, as is done now). In the past, there have been two objections to this approach: first, the overhead that would be added to the Pointer type - the vast majority of LLVM users don't want to have to pay an extra 4-8 bytes per

On Sun, Dec 30, 2012 at 2:17 AM, David Chisnall <David.Chisnall at cl.cam.ac.uk > wrote: > On 30 Dec 2012, at 01:54, Talin wrote: > > > I completely agree with your point about wanting to be able to attach GC > metadata to a type (rather than attaching it to a value, as is done now). > In the past, there have been two objections to this approach: first, the > overhead

Hello, I have a system of quadratic equations (results of a Hamiltonian optimization) which I need to find the roots for. Is there a package and/or function which will find the roots for a quadratic system? Note that I am not opimizing, but rather solving the first order conditions which come from a Hamiltonian. I am basically looking for something in R that will do the same thing as fsolve in