similar to: [LLVMdev] Using LLVM code in projects/compiler-rt

On Thu, May 31, 2012 at 1:13 PM, Rafael Espíndola < rafael.espindola at gmail.com> wrote: > On 31 May 2012 05:02, Alexey Samsonov <samsonov at google.com> wrote: > > Hi, > > > > tl;dr How can I include LLVM headers and use code from libLLVM*.a files > when > > building compiler-rt libraries? > > LLVM and compiler-rt have different licenses

On May 31, 2012, at 1:20 PM, Chandler Carruth wrote: > On Thu, May 31, 2012 at 1:13 PM, Rafael Espíndola <rafael.espindola at gmail.com> wrote: > On 31 May 2012 05:02, Alexey Samsonov <samsonov at google.com> wrote: > > Hi, > > > > tl;dr How can I include LLVM headers and use code from libLLVM*.a files when > > building compiler-rt libraries? > >

On 31 May 2012 05:02, Alexey Samsonov <samsonov at google.com> wrote: > Hi, > > tl;dr How can I include LLVM headers and use code from libLLVM*.a files when > building compiler-rt libraries? LLVM and compiler-rt have different licenses (compiler-rt is dual licensed with the MIT license). Would that be a problem? > > TIA > Cheers, Rafael

On Thu, May 31, 2012 at 5:39 PM, Chris Lattner <clattner at apple.com> wrote: > > On May 31, 2012, at 1:20 PM, Chandler Carruth wrote: > > On Thu, May 31, 2012 at 1:13 PM, Rafael Espíndola < > rafael.espindola at gmail.com> wrote: > >> On 31 May 2012 05:02, Alexey Samsonov <samsonov at google.com> wrote: >> > Hi, >> > >> > tl;dr

On Fri, Jun 1, 2012 at 12:49 PM, Benjamin Kramer <benny.kra at googlemail.com>wrote: > > On 01.06.2012, at 08:14, Kostya Serebryany wrote: > > > > > > > On Fri, Jun 1, 2012 at 7:13 AM, Chris Lattner <clattner at apple.com> > wrote: > > On May 31, 2012, at 6:48 PM, Chandler Carruth wrote: > >> I'm not sure that this solves the problem.

On Fri, Jun 1, 2012 at 12:56 PM, Kostya Serebryany <kcc at google.com> wrote: > > > On Fri, Jun 1, 2012 at 12:49 PM, Benjamin Kramer <benny.kra at googlemail.com > > wrote: > >> >> On 01.06.2012, at 08:14, Kostya Serebryany wrote: >> >> > >> > >> > On Fri, Jun 1, 2012 at 7:13 AM, Chris Lattner <clattner at apple.com>

(resurrecting the thread, as much is discussed here already) Formulating Kostya's suggestion: What do you think of compiling LLVM sources into ASan/TSan runtime by just taking the library sources, providing custom compiler (target) flags *and* a flag "-Dllvm=__sanitizer_llvm"? Yeah, it's hacky and applicable to LLVM libs, but OTOH we don't plan to use smth else for now (in

On Thu, Jun 21, 2012 at 1:34 PM, Dmitry Vyukov <dvyukov at google.com> wrote: > On Thu, Jun 21, 2012 at 1:30 PM, Chandler Carruth <chandlerc at google.com>wrote: > >> Can we alter the build system so that when building a run-time library >>>>>> it modifies all .cpp files like this: >>>>>> namespace FOO { >>>>>>

On Fri, Jun 1, 2012 at 7:13 AM, Chris Lattner <clattner at apple.com> wrote: > On May 31, 2012, at 6:48 PM, Chandler Carruth wrote: > > I'm not sure that this solves the problem. The reason we have dual >> licenses for the runtime stuff is that we don't want the UIUC license >> (which has a binary attribution clause) to affect stuff built with the >>

X32 support patch for compiler-rt. Applies against current trunk. --- projects/compiler-rt/make/platform/clang_linux.mk~ 2013-08-21 06:27:38.000000000 +0000 +++ projects/compiler-rt/make/platform/clang_linux.mk 2013-08-21 11:16:55.891621025 +0000 @@ -41,7 +41,18 @@ SupportedArches += x86_64 endif else - SupportedArches := x86_64 + # x86-64 arch has two ABIs 64 bit x86-64 and 32 bit

On Thu, Jun 21, 2012 at 1:44 PM, Chandler Carruth <chandlerc at google.com>wrote: > Can we alter the build system so that when building a run-time library it >>>>>>>> modifies all .cpp files like this: >>>>>>>> namespace FOO { >>>>>>>> <file body> >>>>>>>> }

> What is the exact line you use to configure build tree, and the output you see? cmake ../.. \ -G Ninja \ -DCMAKE_INSTALL_PREFIX=ship \ -DCMAKE_BUILD_TYPE=Release \ -DLLVM_ENABLE_ASSERTIONS=ON \ -DLLVM_TARGETS_TO_BUILD=ARM \ -DLLVM_DEFAULT_TARGET_TRIPLE=arm-none-linux-gnueabi \ -DLLVM_TARGET_ARCH=arm-none-linux-gnueabi \ -DLLVM_LIT_ARGS=-v ninja check-all

On Thu, Jun 21, 2012 at 2:39 AM, Alexey Samsonov <samsonov at google.com>wrote: > > > On Thu, Jun 21, 2012 at 1:34 PM, Dmitry Vyukov <dvyukov at google.com> wrote: > >> On Thu, Jun 21, 2012 at 1:30 PM, Chandler Carruth <chandlerc at google.com>wrote: >> >>> Can we alter the build system so that when building a run-time library

On Tue, Oct 29, 2013 at 10:55 AM, Greg Fitzgerald <garious at gmail.com> wrote: > > What is the exact line you use to configure build tree, and the output > you see? > > cmake ../.. \ > -G Ninja \ > -DCMAKE_INSTALL_PREFIX=ship \ > -DCMAKE_BUILD_TYPE=Release \ > -DLLVM_ENABLE_ASSERTIONS=ON \ > -DLLVM_TARGETS_TO_BUILD=ARM \ >

On May 31, 2012, at 6:48 PM, Chandler Carruth wrote: > I'm not sure that this solves the problem. The reason we have dual licenses for the runtime stuff is that we don't want the UIUC license (which has a binary attribution clause) to affect stuff built with the compiler. Saying that "clang -fasan produces code that has to binary attribute the LLVM license" is pretty lame.

Reviving the discussion. The cool cmake-build of compiler-rt is not completely functional, but allows sanitizer runtimes to reuse LLVM code with almost no dirty hacks. Suppose I want to run call functions from LLVM libs (currently: LLVMDebugInfo, LLVMSupport) from sanitizer runtime. 1) I can simply include LLVM headers in sanitizer runtime, and it compiles and builds static asan runtime

Are there any sanitizer lit tests in non-X86 configurations? For example: $ cmake -DLLVM_TARGETS_TO_BUILD=ARM \ -DLLVM_DEFAULT_TARGET_TRIPLE=arm-none-linux-gnueabi \ -DLLVM_TARGET_ARCH=arm-none-linux-gnueabi All ASan tests were removed from the build and all the other sanitizers have tests but they all fail. Should they all be disabled too? Or can we add a REQUIRES tag to get lit to

yes I think that is correct. I wrote a simple program to print if sizeof(uintptr_t) != sizeof(unsigned char *) and when I compile with gcc -m64 and execute it on a 64-bit host (that is different from the 32-bit laptop on which I originally compiled the program), it says the sizes are not equal. Thanks Pranav On Thu, Aug 1, 2013 at 9:29 AM, Alexey Samsonov <samsonov at google.com> wrote:

Dear Alexey, Yes I am sure that the llvm, clang and compiler-rt are synced to the same version. I downloaded them all from git http://llvm.org/docs/GettingStarted.html#git-mirror I think I need compiler-rt for my project but I'll verify it again to see if I can proceed without it. You are correct that compiler-rt is compiled with the just built clang. The complete command that gives an error

On 01.06.2012, at 08:14, Kostya Serebryany wrote: > > > On Fri, Jun 1, 2012 at 7:13 AM, Chris Lattner <clattner at apple.com> wrote: > On May 31, 2012, at 6:48 PM, Chandler Carruth wrote: >> I'm not sure that this solves the problem. The reason we have dual licenses for the runtime stuff is that we don't want the UIUC license (which has a binary attribution