similar to: [LLVMdev] Missing Configure Checks

> > On Oct 20, 2011, at 3:13 AM, Shea Levy wrote: > >> Hello, >> >> The llvm 2.9 configure script fails to check for groff, causing a >> failure very late in the game when building man pages, and, on OSX, >> sw_vers. I'll try to write a patch for this myself, but autoconf is >> largely black magic to me so I thought I'd throw this out there in

On Oct 20, 2011, at 3:13 AM, Shea Levy wrote: > Hello, > > The llvm 2.9 configure script fails to check for groff, causing a > failure very late in the game when building man pages, and, on OSX, > sw_vers. I'll try to write a patch for this myself, but autoconf is > largely black magic to me so I thought I'd throw this out there in case > someone more experienced

On 05/02/2012 01:00 PM, Dave Zarzycki wrote: > Shea, > > Feasible? Sure, anything is feasible. A good idea? Not really. The internal lld file format is an _intermediate_ data structure designed to make creating the final executable straightforward and fast. It isn't designed to be an executable format itself. In fact, the reason why linkers can often be slow is because the

Shea, Feasible? Sure, anything is feasible. A good idea? Not really. The internal lld file format is an _intermediate_ data structure designed to make creating the final executable straightforward and fast. It isn't designed to be an executable format itself. In fact, the reason why linkers can often be slow is because the intermediate and final object file formats are conflated. davez On

On 10/19/11 11:58 PM, Eli Friedman wrote: > On Wed, Oct 19, 2011 at 8:20 PM, Shea Levy<shea at shealevy.com> wrote: >> 2. Are target-specific behaviors documented for each supported target? > When anything has target-specific behavior, that fact should be > documented. Beyond that, if you have a question about what some > construct is supposed to do, please ask. What I

Hello, Would it be feasible to use the internal lld file format as the native executable format for an OS? Are there performance or space considerations that would make this a poor choice? Cheers, Shea Levy P.S. please CC me on replies, I'm not subscribed.

On Wed, Oct 19, 2011 at 8:20 PM, Shea Levy <shea at shealevy.com> wrote: > Hello, > > I'd like write a program that performs static analysis of code at the > LLVM assembly/bitcode level, and to do so I plan on extensively > referencing the language reference. As I hope to eventually use this > tool as part of a security analysis of untrusted code, I need to be >

Hello, I'd like write a program that performs static analysis of code at the LLVM assembly/bitcode level, and to do so I plan on extensively referencing the language reference. As I hope to eventually use this tool as part of a security analysis of untrusted code, I need to be rather strict in my interpretation of the document. As such, I have some questions about how the implementers

On Thu, Oct 20, 2011 at 2:37 AM, Shea Levy <shea at shealevy.com> wrote: >. The > (probably impossible) end-goals to this project would be a) that every > program which passes its checks would be as safe to run in kernel mode > with full memory access as it would be in user mode That would be a very useful thing to have for embedded systems. Some such as uCLinux run ports of

On 12/19/11 7:19 PM, Howard Hinnant wrote: > On Dec 19, 2011, at 7:14 PM, Shea Levy wrote: > >> Hello all, >> >> Is it possible, if using libc++ and compiler-rt, to have a clang with no >> runtime dependencies on any GCC components on Linux? If not, will this >> ever be possible? > We are working on a new libc++abi: http://libcxxabi.llvm.org/ which carries

I found a fix! The first hunk of https://reviews.llvm.org/D17533 (lib/CodeGen/TargetFrameLoweringImpl.cpp) on top of 3.8.1 does the trick. Does llvm do patch releases of old versions? Davide Italiano <davide at freebsd.org> writes: > On Fri, Oct 21, 2016 at 6:19 AM, Shea Levy via llvm-dev > <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: >> Hi all, >> >> I'm hitting

On 5/2/12 10:29 AM, Shea Levy wrote: > Hello, > > Would it be feasible to use the internal lld file format as the native > executable format for an OS? Are there performance or space > considerations that would make this a poor choice? By lld, do you mean the LLVM IR bitcode format, or are you referring to something else? As far as using LLVM IR as a format for executables, there

Hello all, Is it possible, if using libc++ and compiler-rt, to have a clang with no runtime dependencies on any GCC components on Linux? If not, will this ever be possible? Cheers, Shea Levy

Hi all, I'm hitting a segfault in llc when trying to build GHC: http://sprunge.us/ZVGB. What is the best way to debug this? I'm able to bump to 3.8.1 if needed, but GHC tends to break when updating major versions due to IR incompatibilities. Thanks, Shea -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size:

Hello, Where can I find documentation about which formats for disk images each driver supports? In particular, do they all support raw disk images? Thanks, Shea Levy

Hello, On my system (Linux 3.3, booting in EFI mode, using Nouveau with nouveau.noaccel=1 due to https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=27501 ), I can't figure out how to change the backlight or switch which of the two graphics cards (I have an Nvidia 9600M GT and a 9400M, both are recognized by nouveau but only the 9400M is ever used) Linux uses for the framebuffer or X uses for

On Dec 19, 2011, at 7:14 PM, Shea Levy wrote: > Hello all, > > Is it possible, if using libc++ and compiler-rt, to have a clang with no > runtime dependencies on any GCC components on Linux? If not, will this > ever be possible? We are working on a new libc++abi: http://libcxxabi.llvm.org/ which carries the llvm license. Howard

On Oct 20, 2011, at 2:37 AM, Shea Levy wrote: > On 10/19/11 11:58 PM, Eli Friedman wrote: >> On Wed, Oct 19, 2011 at 8:20 PM, Shea Levy<shea at shealevy.com> wrote: >>> 2. Are target-specific behaviors documented for each supported target? >> When anything has target-specific behavior, that fact should be >> documented. Beyond that, if you have a question

Hi, On boot, I'd like to pass a public key to the VM to use for root ssh logins, and obviously only the user that started the VM on the host should be able to send the key. What's the best way to pass this kind of information into the VM? I thought about using a serial port connected to a fifo on the host, but I'd rather not deal with serial programming if I can avoid it...

Hi, I get the error "Operation not permitted" when I try to delete a file as root, see some commands below. - there is no "i" attribute - it's a problem with the files and not the upper directories since I can delete a similar file in the same directory - fsck -f doesn't find any error on the partition - the partition is mounted rw If this is not the right place to