similar to: [LLVMdev] alloca and the difference between required and optimal alignment

On Fri, Mar 02, 2012 at 11:58:29AM -0500, Cameron McInally wrote: > On Fri, Mar 2, 2012 at 11:32 AM, Evandro Menezes <emenezes at codeaurora.org> > wrote: > ... > > Figure 3.3 on page 16 of www.x86-64.org/documentation/abi.pdf is not > > normative. See foot note 7 in the same page. Figure 3.4 on page 21 > > confirms that the use of a frame-pointer is optional.

On Mon, Jun 18, 2012 at 6:30 PM, Joerg Sonnenberger <joerg at britannica.bec.de > wrote: > On Mon, Jun 18, 2012 at 05:52:49PM +0400, Kostya Serebryany wrote: > > On Mon, Jun 18, 2012 at 5:43 PM, Joerg Sonnenberger < > joerg at britannica.bec.de > > > wrote: > > > > > On Mon, Jun 18, 2012 at 05:19:11PM +0400, Kostya Serebryany wrote: > > > >

On Mon, Jun 18, 2012 at 06:44:57PM +0400, Kostya Serebryany wrote: > On Mon, Jun 18, 2012 at 6:30 PM, Joerg Sonnenberger <joerg at britannica.bec.de > > wrote: > > > On Mon, Jun 18, 2012 at 05:52:49PM +0400, Kostya Serebryany wrote: > > > On Mon, Jun 18, 2012 at 5:43 PM, Joerg Sonnenberger < > > joerg at britannica.bec.de > > > > wrote: > >

On Mon, Jun 18, 2012 at 5:43 PM, Joerg Sonnenberger <joerg at britannica.bec.de > wrote: > On Mon, Jun 18, 2012 at 05:19:11PM +0400, Kostya Serebryany wrote: > > On Mon, Jun 18, 2012 at 5:07 PM, Joerg Sonnenberger < > joerg at britannica.bec.de > > > wrote: > > > > > On Mon, Jun 18, 2012 at 02:39:34PM +0400, Kostya Serebryany wrote: > > > >

On Mon, Jun 18, 2012 at 05:52:49PM +0400, Kostya Serebryany wrote: > On Mon, Jun 18, 2012 at 5:43 PM, Joerg Sonnenberger <joerg at britannica.bec.de > > wrote: > > > On Mon, Jun 18, 2012 at 05:19:11PM +0400, Kostya Serebryany wrote: > > > On Mon, Jun 18, 2012 at 5:07 PM, Joerg Sonnenberger < > > joerg at britannica.bec.de > > > > wrote: > >

On Sun, Mar 22, 2015 at 5:57 AM Joerg Sonnenberger <joerg at britannica.bec.de> wrote: > On Fri, Mar 20, 2015 at 08:06:11PM -0700, Tim Northover wrote: > > > mul can be inlined easily if necessary for arbitrary sizes, but div is > very expensive. > > > > Shall I file a bug for "implement FFT in LLVM"? > > I didn't say it is the most efficient

On Tue, Dec 27, 2011 at 12:22 PM, Joerg Sonnenberger < joerg at britannica.bec.de> wrote: > On Tue, Dec 27, 2011 at 12:10:54PM -0800, Kostya Serebryany wrote: > > What would be the best fix for asan? > > Can you be explicit what you need to asan? Just the equivalent of > __builtin_return_address(0) or do you really need a full stack trace? > asan-rt uses

On Mon, Jun 18, 2012 at 5:07 PM, Joerg Sonnenberger <joerg at britannica.bec.de > wrote: > On Mon, Jun 18, 2012 at 02:39:34PM +0400, Kostya Serebryany wrote: > > Another difference from Memcheck is that we propose to use 8 shadow bits > > per byte of application memory and use a > > direct shadow mapping (for 64-bit linux that is just clearing 46-th bit > of >

On Tue, Dec 10, 2013 at 03:26:56PM +0000, Tim Northover wrote: > On 10 December 2013 15:00, Joerg Sonnenberger <joerg at britannica.bec.de> wrote: > > On Tue, Dec 10, 2013 at 02:26:53PM +0000, Renato Golin wrote: > >> In a nutshell, it seems to be our consensus that the integrated > >> assembly can now be turned on by default on ARM, and we should add > >>

> De : Joerg Sonnenberger [mailto:joerg at britannica.bec.de] > > The basic idea is to still create a relocation on the MC level, but fix it up later. > You didn't say if your ISA is fixed or variable length, the former, can simplify > this quite bit. The constant island pass generally tries to address two issues: > (1) Merging of identical constants. > (2) Splitting the

On 2 Nov 2014, at 14:17, Joerg Sonnenberger <joerg at britannica.bec.de> wrote: > Requiring cmake for NetBSD is not acceptable as it is almost as heavy as > a C++ compiler itself. That said, I don't really care about the > Makefiles, just about configure and the associated loggic to craete > Config.h and friends. I would expect FreeBSD to have similar concerns. For the

On Thu, Jul 21, 2011 at 12:26:29PM +0100, Jay Foad wrote: > On 21 July 2011 11:50, Joerg Sonnenberger <joerg at britannica.bec.de> wrote: > > There is still the major regression with unreadable version numbers. > > Given the amount of Bugzilla traffic with "Fixed in...", that's a > > non-trivial issue. > > I wouldn't call that a major regression.

On Oct 18, 2014, at 5:25 PM, Joerg Sonnenberger <joerg at britannica.bec.de> wrote: > On Sun, Oct 19, 2014 at 06:58:53AM +0700, C Bergström wrote: >> On Sun, Oct 19, 2014 at 6:45 AM, Joerg Sonnenberger <joerg at britannica.bec.de >>> wrote: >> >>> On Sun, Oct 19, 2014 at 06:31:24AM +0700, C Bergström wrote: >>>> I apologize that I haven't

On Tue, Dec 27, 2011 at 12:35:52PM -0800, Kostya Serebryany wrote: > On Tue, Dec 27, 2011 at 12:22 PM, Joerg Sonnenberger < > joerg at britannica.bec.de> wrote: > > > On Tue, Dec 27, 2011 at 12:10:54PM -0800, Kostya Serebryany wrote: > > > What would be the best fix for asan? > > > > Can you be explicit what you need to asan? Just the equivalent of >

On Mon, Jun 18, 2012 at 05:19:11PM +0400, Kostya Serebryany wrote: > On Mon, Jun 18, 2012 at 5:07 PM, Joerg Sonnenberger <joerg at britannica.bec.de > > wrote: > > > On Mon, Jun 18, 2012 at 02:39:34PM +0400, Kostya Serebryany wrote: > > > Another difference from Memcheck is that we propose to use 8 shadow bits > > > per byte of application memory and use a

On 21 July 2011 11:50, Joerg Sonnenberger <joerg at britannica.bec.de> wrote: > There is still the major regression with unreadable version numbers. > Given the amount of Bugzilla traffic with "Fixed in...", that's a > non-trivial issue. I wouldn't call that a major regression. For informal use you can quote 8 hex digits of the git commit name, which isn't

On Sun, Oct 19, 2014 at 6:45 AM, Joerg Sonnenberger <joerg at britannica.bec.de > wrote: > On Sun, Oct 19, 2014 at 06:31:24AM +0700, C Bergström wrote: > > I apologize that I haven't been able to follow this thread entirely, but > if > > someone gives me a Fortran testcase I can check what Fortran+llvm would > do > > currently and maybe give more feedback.

On 10 December 2013 15:00, Joerg Sonnenberger <joerg at britannica.bec.de> wrote: > On Tue, Dec 10, 2013 at 02:26:53PM +0000, Renato Golin wrote: >> In a nutshell, it seems to be our consensus that the integrated >> assembly can now be turned on by default on ARM, and we should add >> -no-integrated-as for the cases where it fails (like the kernel). > > It

On Sat, Mar 29, 2014 at 12:36:45PM +0000, Renato Golin wrote: > On 29 March 2014 12:27, Joerg Sonnenberger <joerg at britannica.bec.de> wrote: > > declare void @llvm.write_register(i32 regno, i32 val) > > declare i32 @llvm.read_register(i32 regno) > > > > where regno is the DWARF name or a special reservation e.g. for IP or > > SP. > > Do front-ends

Thanks Joerg. I've made the change you suggested and verified that it still works. I think the noinline is still required though as this function can be called from a couple of places and gdb will want to set its breakpoint on the single function address. Let me know if you think otherwise though. Cheers, Andrew On Fri, Dec 20, 2013 at 11:52 AM, Joerg Sonnenberger < joerg at