similar to: [LLVMdev] TableGen backend API refactoring.

Hi, I try to write a new backend. At the moment I run into a compiler error and don't know how I can solve this problem. Like several other targets I have a file 'mybackendTargetInfo.cpp' in the subdirectory 'TargetInfo'. The content of this file is: #include "mybackend.h" #include "llvm/Module.h" #include "llvm/Support/TargetRegistry.h" using

Hi, I want to invoke the AddReadAttrs pass with my software backend (derived from TargetMachine like CBackend). CBackend uses addPassesToEmitWholeFile-method for invoking several passes. I tried to use the same method, but it failed on runtime. Running llc with my backend produces (mac os x 10.5 and llvm 2.4): dyld: lazy symbol binding failed: Symbol not found:

I made my first attempt to build on an x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu system. Is this supposed to work? I get libtools errors (below). The problem seems to be that it finds a 32-bit libltdl rather than the 64-bit libltdl. /home/dag> ls /usr/lib/libltdl.so.3.1.0 /usr/lib/libltdl.so.3.1.0 /home/dag> ls /usr/lib64/libltdl.so.3.1.0 /usr/lib64/libltdl.so.3.1.0 Is this a known problem?

On OS X 10.5.5 I get an error that ld doesn't support -export-dynamic: dhcp-172-19-103-185:~/src/llvm/trunk_nolibtool/obj jyasskin$ ../src/configure --prefix=`pwd`/../install && make VERBOSE=1 ... dhcp-172-19-103-185:~/src/llvm/trunk_nolibtool/obj jyasskin$ make VERBOSE=1 for dir in lib/System lib/Support utils lib/VMCore lib tools/llvm-config tools docs; do \ if [ ! -f

On Mon, Sep 17, 2007 at 12:25:40PM -0700, Chris Lattner wrote: > On Mon, 17 Sep 2007, Emil Mikulic wrote: > >> The 2.1 pre-release (version 1) is available for testing: > >> http://llvm.org/prereleases/2.1/version1/ > > > > I suspect the utils/TableGen/FileParser.h.cvs in the tarball may be > > stale. I tried building LLVM without bison installed and got:

I'm getting an error when trying to build llvm 2.2's tblgen: llvm[2]: Linking Release executable tblgen (without symbols) /usr/bin/ld: Undefined symbols: llvm::MemoryBuffer::getFileOrSTDIN(char const*, unsigned int, std::basic_string<char, std::char_traits<char>, std::allocator<char> >*, long long) llvm::cl::ParseCommandLineOptions(int, char**, char const*) It's

Hi there, I am doing relocation in my backend by calling my function getAddrNonPic: SDValue getAddrNonPIC(NodeTy *N, SDLoc DL, EVT Ty, SelectionDAG &DAG)const{ SValue Hi=getTarget(N,Ty,DAG, MyBackend::Hi16); SValue Lo=getTarget(N,Ty,DAG, MyBackend::Lo16); return DAG.getNode(ISD::ADD, DL, Ty, DAG.getNode(MyBackend::Hi16, DL, Ty, Hi), DAG.getNode(MyBackend::Lo16, DL, Ty, Ho)); }

Hi I have written a pass which creates some scheduling information. Its called MParSchedule. This pass works with opt. But when feeding it my experimental backend it seems to loose instructions and fails to work. I am loading this stuff as .so libraries under linux and i am using the amd64 version with a self compiled llvm-gcc. With this call it works: opt

Henrik Bach wrote: > Hi LLVM'ers > > When linking tblgen tool I get below error message on MinGW. > > I have put TOOLLINKOPTS=-ldbghelp in Makefile.config. > > However, when rearranging library dbghelp to the end of the g++ > line, tblgen gets linked. It seems that the -L path options are specified before the LLVM libraries (libSystem and libsupport) are linked in.

Hi LLVM'ers When linking tblgen tool I get below error message on MinGW. I have put TOOLLINKOPTS=-ldbghelp in Makefile.config. However, when rearranging library dbghelp to the end of the g++ line, tblgen gets linked. -------------------------- make[2]: Entering directory `/C/Projects/build/MinGW/llvm/utils/TableGen' Linking Debug executable tblgen /C/Projects/build/MinGW/llvm/mklib

Hi all, The goal of this RFC is to make information related to variant scheduling classes accessible at MC level. This would help tools like llvm-mca understand/resolve variant scheduling classes. To achieve this goal, I plan to introduce a new class of scheduling predicates named MCSchedPredicate. An MCSchedPredicate allows the definition of boolean expressions with a well-known semantic, that

>Resources and latency are not tied. An instruction is mapped to a scheduling class. A scheduling class is mapped to a set of resources and a per-operand list of latencies. Thanks for your kind explanation. Our heuristic algorithm have needed the latency and the resource per operand to check resource conflicts per cycle. In order to support this with LLVM, I expected a per-operand list of

On Mon, 24 Oct 2005, Vladimir A. Merzliakov wrote: >>> 2) Same error but some diff. problem with AlphaCodeEmitter.cpp and >>> PPCCodeEmitter.cpp: >>> >>> GCC don't like definition member-functions in global namespace with >>> declaration in llvm::<unnamed> : > > Sorry for wrong comment. > Must be: > GCC 4.1.0 don't like

> On May 10, 2018, at 8:58 AM, Andrea Di Biagio <andrea.dibiagio at gmail.com> wrote: > > Hi all, > > The goal of this RFC is to make information related to variant scheduling > classes accessible at MC level. This would help tools like llvm-mca > understand/resolve variant scheduling classes. > > To achieve this goal, I plan to introduce a new class of

On Nov 29, 2011, at 12:26 AM, David Blaikie wrote: > For a bit of an experiment I've been trying to compile LLVM & Clang > with -Weverything (disabling any errors that seem like more noise/less > interesting). One warning I've recently hit a few instances of is > -Wweak-vtable which is, in fact, an explicitly documented LLVM coding > standard (

For a bit of an experiment I've been trying to compile LLVM & Clang with -Weverything (disabling any errors that seem like more noise/less interesting). One warning I've recently hit a few instances of is -Wweak-vtable which is, in fact, an explicitly documented LLVM coding standard ( http://llvm.org/docs/CodingStandards.html#ll_virtual_anch ). Some instances of this have been easy to

> Calling 0 is undefined behavior; the optimizer is within its rights to > remove this. Why do you want to call 0? For example, on embedded platforms you call 0 to do a soft reset. > _______________________________________________ > LLVM Developers mailing list > LLVMdev at cs.uiuc.edu http://llvm.cs.uiuc.edu > http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/llvmdev

I am working on implementing break/continue and the flow control graphs that I am seeing are having all sorts of weird flow control that does not necessarily exist in the IR representation. For, example, a simple code segment that is a while loop w/ a continue ends up generating a CFG that is two while loops with one embedded inside each other. I've attached the dot files and the IR code. Any

For those of you who haven't noticed, I'm planning to commit a major change to the Makefile rules tomorrow evening (Tuesday) if there are no complaints about it between now and then. This needs testing on Darwin. I've heard back from Linux on many platforms and even FreeBSD, which is fantastic, but I'm told that lots of LLVMers are running Darwin and I haven't heard a peep

On Mon, Dec 19, 2011 at 6:50 PM, David Blaikie <dblaikie at gmail.com> wrote: > Author: dblaikie > Date: Mon Dec 19 20:50:00 2011 > New Revision: 146960 > > URL: http://llvm.org/viewvc/llvm-project?rev=146960&view=rev > Log: > Unweaken vtables as per http://llvm.org/docs/CodingStandards.html#ll_virtual_anch So now that I've got Clang & LLVM almost entirely