similar to: [LLVMdev] The porting issue from llvm-2.8 to llvm-3.0

"Michael.Kang" <blackfin.kang at gmail.com> writes: > error: incomplete type 'llvm::ConstantInt' used in nested name specifier > > So who can give me some hints for the issue? Maybe you are not including the relevant headers? ConstantInt is defined in Constants.h

I have a value of long type and like to get the data at the adress in the value: ################# unsigned long v = 0xc0008000 Value* addr = ConstantInt::get(getIntegerType(64), v) #################### Then I try to use LoadInstr to get a load instruction of ir as the following: ############################ Value* data = new LoadInst(addr, "", false, bb); encounter segmentation

I like to get the support of llvm runtime so that I can run some VM that depends on llvm. I googled porting keyword and also simply try to cross compile llvm. Just like to know is it possbile ? Does any modification needed? Thanks MK -- www.skyeye.org

On Wed, Nov 17, 2010 at 12:11 AM, Bruno Cardoso Lopes <bruno.cardoso at gmail.com> wrote: > Hi, > > On Sun, Nov 14, 2010 at 5:39 AM, Michael.Kang <blackfin.kang at gmail.com> wrote: >> I like to get the support of llvm runtime so that I can run some VM >> that depends on llvm. I googled porting keyword >> and also simply try to cross compile llvm. Just like

I successfully ported our project from llvm-2.8 to llvm-3.0. The most important change is you need to change some argument type from Vector to llvm::ArrayRef, such as CallInst::Create, FunctionType::get etc. Until now , our project is running fine except some minor issue. I still need to look into if the current issues is related to llvm 3.0 Thanks all your help. Thanks MK On Wed, Jun 13, 2012

Now I have an address that present in a unsigned long address like the following format: Value* addr = CONST(0xc0008000) But I do not know how to read the data from the above addr varaible. I tried the following three kind of code: 1. Code: Value* addr = CONST(0xc0008000); Value* data = new LoadInst(addr, "", false, bb); Error: Segmentation fault 2. Code(

We try to use llvm to translate and generate the native code in parallel with multi-thread. But some various bugs will be triggered. We run the following code in multithread environment: ################## BasicBlock::Create(_CTX(), "dispatch", cpu->cur_func, 0); BranchInst::Create(bb_start, label_entry); cpu->exec_engine->getPointerToFunction ##################3 And cpu

Hi, There are numerous emails flying around the list at the moment regarding the state of the JIT. In its current state it is infeasible to add support for another architecture (very difficult to say the least) - there are plans currently being formulated to deal with this and convert the JIT to the new MC architecture, which would allow much easier porting between platforms. Have a look for the

On Fri, Mar 25, 2011 at 8:53 PM, Michael.Kang <blackfin.kang at gmail.com> wrote: > I have a value of long type and like to get the data at the adress in the value: > > ################# > unsigned long v = 0xc0008000 > Value* addr = ConstantInt::get(getIntegerType(64), v) > #################### > > Then I try to use LoadInstr to get a load instruction of ir as the

Hi, everyone: I am very sorry to trouble you, but I need your help about my problem about ThreadLocalImpl in llvm of 2.8 version. I have compiled it in Windows xp with mingw, and have compiled skyeye(an open source project about simulator) as it uses llvm. But when I run a testcase ---- arm_hello, it came out segment fault. I used gdb.exe to trace it, it gave the following infomation: $

Hi, > I am very sorry to trouble you, but I need your help about my problem about > ThreadLocalImpl in llvm of 2.8 version. this is a very old version of LLVM, I suggest you try something newer, eg the recently released version 3.1. Best wishes, Duncan. I have compiled it in Windows xp with > mingw, and have compiled skyeye(an open source project about simulator) as it > uses

Hi Michael, > Now I have an address that present in a unsigned long address like the > following format: > Value* addr = CONST(0xc0008000) what is the type of addr? For that matter, what is CONST - what does it do? Ciao, Duncan. > > But I do not know how to read the data from the above addr varaible. I > tried the following three kind of code: > 1. Code: >

Hi all: I am trying to compare the return value of a call instruction with 0. The called function's return type is uint32. The return value is 1 or 0. But the icmp instruction cannot be created. CallInst *ret = CallInst::Create(ptr_func, params.begin(), params.end(), "", bb); Value *cmp = new ICmpInst(*bb, ICmpInst::ICMP_EQ, ret, ,ConstantInt::get(getIntegerType(32), 0)

Hi, On Sun, Nov 14, 2010 at 5:39 AM, Michael.Kang <blackfin.kang at gmail.com> wrote: > I like to get the support of llvm runtime so that I can run some VM > that depends on llvm. I googled porting keyword > and also simply try to cross compile llvm. Just like to know is it > possbile ? Does any modification needed? You can compile and run llvm tools in a mips machine, but

On Mon, Jun 11, 2012 at 5:44 PM, Joey Gouly <joel.gouly at gmail.com> wrote: > Hi Xiu, > > The Verifier pass runs a PreVerifier pass, which does not honour the > action argument, > and will always abort on a broken module, (Line 106, > lib/VMCore/Verifier.cpp) > So the argument can not be used as described as the official document? I just want to make sure of that and

2010/9/2 NAKAMURA Takumi <geek4civic at gmail.com>: > Good evening, Yuan > > Excuse me, I gave up Debug build earlier due to my poor hosts. > I will improve able to build Debug ;) > > You may build with --enable-optimized=yes > (or, make ENABLE_OPTIMIZED=1) > > btw, DLL builder has implemented since Aug. > It might be easier to port DLL stuff to 2.6 :) Do you

On Wed, Nov 17, 2010 at 4:30 PM, James Molloy <James.Molloy at arm.com> wrote: > Hi, > > There are numerous emails flying around the list at the moment regarding the state of the JIT. In its current state it is infeasible to add support for another architecture (very difficult to say the least) - there are plans currently being formulated to deal with this and convert the JIT to the

I saw the description in llvm documenattion for sext is as the following : -- sext (CST to TYPE) Sign extend a constant to another type. The bit size of CST must be smaller or equal to the bit size of TYPE. Both types must be integers. But in the code of llvm-2.6, the judge condition just allow smaller to the bit size of TYPE as the following : case Instruction::SExt: return

Hi all, We're hitting some walls here when generating the correct structure layout for specific C++ ABI requirements, and I was wondering how much StructLayout could help. For instance, the ABI has some complicated rules on the size of derived classes (http://www.codesourcery.com/public/cxx-abi/abi.html#class-types) and LLVM struct type cannot reflect that in full. Example: // CHECK:

On Tue, Jun 12, 2012 at 10:11:01AM +0800, Michael.Kang wrote: > > > On Mon, Jun 11, 2012 at 5:44 PM, Joey Gouly <joel.gouly at gmail.com> wrote: > > Hi Xiu, > > The Verifier pass runs a PreVerifier pass, which does not honour the action > argument, > and will always abort on a broken module, (Line 106, lib/VMCore/ > Verifier.cpp) >