similar to: [LLVMdev] Debugging LLVM IR

Hello all, When using the JIT on ARM, I get the following error message. The code works fine on both X86 32 and 64 bit architectures. rbx: /home/dirkjan/llvm-3.3.src/include/llvm/CodeGen/MachineOperand.h:260: unsigned int llvm::MachineOperand::getReg() const: Assertion `isReg() && "This is not a register operand!"' failed. Program received signal SIGABRT, Aborted.

Hi Dirkjan, > I've tried looking for this error, but can't seem to find any more information on what the cause of this could be. This looks like a backtrace from the legacy JIT. Unfortunately that's known to be broken on ARM and you should use the MCJIT instead (see tools/lli/lli.cpp for an example of how to enable it). We're hoping to get rid of the old one soon, but there

Thanks for the reply, nice to have some validation. I thought of another approach which might be preferable: generate relocatable code, use a JITEventListener to grab each function and copy it to my own memory, let all the LLVM stuff die normally then use my copy of the code. However when I call setRelocationModel(Reloc::PIC_) on the engine builder I get code that seg faults. The assembly looks

Hi Andy, One of the issues that I found not intuitive, is that when an ExecutionEngine is deallocated, the memory manager's destructor is also called. This resulted in having to write two objects in my case, one as a per JIT request memory manager and one global JIT memory manager. The per request JIT memory manager gets memory from the global manager, but both ended up implementing

I'm not sure I see why the delegating memory manager feels wrong to both of you. That's exactly the kind of usage model I would envision for clients that needed to handle multiple ExecutionEngines that had reason to share a memory manager. I'm saying this as an invitation to discussion, not to be argumentative. We certainly could change things if it would make the design better.

Hi Dirkjan, Are you using JIT or MCJIT? Cheers. ________________________________________ From: llvmdev-bounces at cs.uiuc.edu [llvmdev-bounces at cs.uiuc.edu] on behalf of Dirkjan Bussink [d.bussink at gmail.com] Sent: Saturday, March 23, 2013 8:18 AM To: Kaylor, Andrew Cc: llvmdev at cs.uiuc.edu Subject: Re: [LLVMdev] Memory clean for applications using LLVM for JIT compilation Hi Andy, One

It seems wrong to delegate a dozen or more methods when I only want to change the behavior in a couple small ways. It would have been easier to derive a class, but the base class is inaccessible (in an anonymous namespace). And I was afraid to roll my own memory manager because I didn't understand what all those methods do. So MCJIT is future - will JITMemoryManager remain relevant? If so I

Hi there, Sorry, I don't have the thread history to reply to since I normally read llvmdev through the archives, but wanted to give my .02 of feedback anyway. As far as I understand, this change is wanted because the LLVM infrastructure derives no value from knowing the types, and there's a cost in terms of code spent to support all of it. I've been creating a frontend that mostly

> Ping? Still looking for advice in figuring out how and why my generated > code is causing lli to crash... Did you run your code through the verifier? > > So for example, when I run lli on my program: > > ---------------------------------------------------------- > > Assertion failed: (V == V2 && "Didn't find key?"), function RemoveKey, > >

Ping? Still looking for advice in figuring out how and why my generated code is causing lli to crash... Talin wrote: > I've been using lli to do most of my unit tests for the compiler that > I'm writing. However, when I get a test that crashes, its difficult to > find which instruction it was that caused the crash. I tried running > bugpoint, but it didn't seem to work

I've been using lli to do most of my unit tests for the compiler that I'm writing. However, when I get a test that crashes, its difficult to find which instruction it was that caused the crash. I tried running bugpoint, but it didn't seem to work for me, and upon reading the documentation, it seems to be intended for a different purpose than finding bugs in my source program; It

Hello, In Rubinius we're seeing an occasional crash inside LLVM that always happens inside getenv(), which is used for example when creating a MCContext (inside lib/MC/MCContext.cpp, it checks getenv("AS_SECURE_LOG_FILE")). The problem is that getenv() and friends aren't thread safe and Rubinius provides a multithreaded system. We can relatively easily get locking setup around

On Tue, Feb 17, 2015 at 8:56 AM, Antoine Pitrou <antoine at python.org> wrote: > > Hi, > > Dirkjan Ochtman <dirkjan <at> ochtman.nl> writes: > > > > As far as I understand, this change is wanted because the LLVM > > infrastructure derives no value from knowing the types, and there's a > > cost in terms of code spent to support all of it.

... and that's kind of annoying when I'm trying to debug something. Also, it doesn't seem like openssh.org lists the IRC channel (even though it's referenced) anywhere. Cheers, Dirkjan

On Thu, May 24, 2012 at 12:53 PM, Mikael Lyngvig <mikael at lyngvig.org> wrote: > One project I'd like to complete pretty soon is to go through the build > instructions, for mingw32, and see if I can't somehow create a mingw64 > build.  I believe the 32-bit platform is dying by the hour so I'm rather > eager to have a mingw64 version of LLVM/Clang.  Also, I'd love

Hello All, This conversations seems to have fizzled out and I would like to try to revive it. My intention is to pick up where Graham left off with enabling partial-inlining by default. On Sat, Dec 9, 2017 at 7:47 AM, Florian Hahn via llvm-dev < llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: > Hi, > > On 13/11/2017 14:47, Evgeny Astigeevich via llvm-dev wrote: > >> Hi Graham,

Right. glibc's amusing stance is that you setenv/putenv are not thread safe, but getenv is. I assume Ruby exposes setenv and therefore simply not calling setenv isn't an option. Would it solve your problems if all getenv() calls happened at cl::ParseCommandLineOptions() time? On Thu, May 23, 2013 at 9:49 AM, Dirkjan Bussink <d.bussink at gmail.com>wrote: > Hello, > >

On Mon, Jan 14, 2013 at 4:56 AM, Dirkjan Bussink <d.bussink at gmail.com>wrote: > Hello all, > > I've already bothered people on IRC with this question and it was > recommended to ask it here. > > First of all, some context. In Rubinius (http://rubini.us/, > http://github.com/rubinius/rubinius) we use LLVM for our JIT. We create > LLVM IR using the C++ API and

All, is anyone using Bayonne in conjunction with Asterisk? I'm currently using only Bayonne, but I'm investigating the possibilities of switching the telephony frontend over to Asterisk, and have Asterisk route the IVR tasks to Bayonne through H323. Anyone care to share his views on this approach? Any pointers or do's and don'ts? All info is greatly appreciated! Regards,

Hi Sean, Thank you for reminding me. It looks like it get lost among tons of emails and other tasks. I’ll check if the code size issues still exist. Thanks, Evgeny Astigeevich From: Sean Fertile <sd.fertile at gmail.com> Date: Monday, 29 January 2018 at 19:52 To: Florian Hahn <Florian.Hahn at arm.com> Cc: Evgeny Astigeevich <Evgeny.Astigeevich at arm.com>, Graham Yiu <gyiu