similar to: [LLVMdev] About thread_local in 3.0

I note also that this is not a currently unsupported target case where an error should/could/would be produced on attempting to emit code with thread local references. I say this because clang is able to compile both c source with __thread on a global and bc containing a @variable = thread_local global ... and a function that references the thread local global variable to both assembly and machine

> I note also that this is not a currently unsupported target case where an error should/could/would be produced on attempting to emit code with thread local references. I say this because clang is able to compile both c source with __thread on a global and bc containing a @variable = thread_local global ... and a function that references the thread local global variable to both assembly and

Hi all, I've been exploring thread local globals in llvm and as part of this investigation I ran llc -march=cpp over a trivial llvm bc file which uses thread local storage for a global. For some reason llc -march=cpp seems to ignore the thread_local and produce code to create a standard global. Is this expected behaviour, a known limitation, or otherwise? Thanks in advance. Details are as

For everyone understand which code must be emitted to implement TLS, I will paste the code generated by gcc for a simple function: __thread int a = 1; int f(){ return a; } gcc teste.c -o teste.s -S -O2 (arm-linux-gnueabi): .global a .section .tdata,"awT",%progbits <== special section for tls symbols .align 2 .type a, %object

On Jan 7, 2011, at 2:36 PM, Venkatraman Govindaraju wrote: > When I run LLC with option "-O0 -march=sparc" on following testcase, > fast register allocator crashes with "UNREACHABLE executed" error. LLC > generates code successfully with other standard register allocators > available. I haven't investigated the Sparc backend specifically but... My guess is

What exactly do the compiler flags`-femulated-tls` and `tls-model` do ? Why does tls-emulation not solve the problem ? Looking at the generated IR, it seems not to remove thread_local variable declarations. What is the reasoning behind that ? 2017-02-07 16:27 GMT+00:00 Gaetano Checinski <gaetano.checinski at gmail.com>: > > got a minimal example now: > extern thread_local

On Sun, Dec 4, 2011 at 9:18 AM, Kai <kai at redstar.de> wrote: > Hi! > > LLVM currently does not implement the implicit TLS model on Windows. This > model is easy: > > - a thread local variable ends up in the .tls section > - to access a thread local variable, you have to do >  (1) load pointer to thread local storage from TEB >      On x86_64, this is gs:0x58, on

Hi Chris, >> PS: With -fplugin-arg-dragonegg-enable-gcc-optzns the LLVM optimizers are run at >> the following levels: >> >> Command line option LLVM optimizers run at >> ------------------- ---------------------- >> -O1 tiny amount of optimization >> -O2 or -O3 -O1 >> -O4 or -O5

target triple = "i386-pc-linux-gnu" On 13/05/2010, at 9:25 PM, Anton Korobeynikov wrote: >> int (*FP)() = (int (*)())FPtr; >> int res = FP(); >> >> when the function executes correctly in the case of instead having created a standard global variable. > What is the platform you're running the code on? > > -- > With best regards, Anton

> I’ve seen the same problem, but didn’t find solution back then. > I can give a hint that it is related to a thread local storage (notice TLS in the name). > > The same result can be reproduced by this simple program: > > thread_local int x = 0; > int main() { > return 0; > } > >When compiled into IR it produces similar error: > >LLVM ERROR:

Hello, I apologize if this has already been fixed or reported. I believe there is a bug in the way the optimizer deals with thread_local variables. The attached program, test.c, has a thread-local variable "int Foo" and a global variable "int *Ptr". The program takes the following steps: 1) The main thread spawns a new thread and waits 2) The new thread writes Foo = 50 and

Hi Duncan, >> #include<stdio.h> >> #include<string.h> >> >> int main(int argc, char** argv){ >> >> char a[8] = "aaaaaaa"; >> char b[8] = "bbbbbbb"; >> >> char *c = (char*) malloc(sizeof(char)*(strlen(a)+strlen(b)+1)); >> memcpy(c, a, strlen(a)); >> memcpy(c + strlen(a), b, strlen(b) + 1); >>

Hi all, I came across something that seems to be a bug in the dragonegg option that emits LLVM IR. ¿Can anybody reproduce the error, or see what's wrong? ¿Should I post it somewhere else in case it's really a bug? Thanks ahead! With this simple program: * #include <stdio.h> #include <string.h> int main(int argc, char** argv){ char a[8] = "aaaaaaa";

Folks, I'm at the point in developing llvmc (Compiler Driver) where I need to get the details on the specific optimization arguments that the -O family of options should (by default) issue to "opt". I'm soliciting your feedback on this so I can start testing optimization. Hopefully you can provide it by early this coming week. For clarity, the -O options are currently defined

Hello, I am trying to compile some code to LLVM IR with a simple "__thread int x" but hitting this error: test.cpp:1:1: error: thread-local storage is unsupported for the current target I'm using both the -S and -emit-llvm options on clang, and was expecting to see "@x = thread_local global i32 0" come out of clang. I am curious why clang even cares about this since

2005/7/24, Chris Lattner <sabre at nondot.org>: > Ah, ok. In that case, you want to put all of the registers in one register > file, and not make the constant register allocatable (e.g. see > X86RegisterInfo.td, and note how the register classes include EBP and ESP, > but do not register allocate them (through the definition of > allocation_order_end()). > > -Chris

Reid, I have one substantial change to suggest to this. I think the distinction between module-level and cross-module optimization is artificial and unnecessary in LLVM because transparent link-time optimization makes intra-module and cross-module optimizations indistiguishable. It *is* important to distinguish between fast and slow optimizations. Because of this, I would suggest a

On Oct 8, 2011, at 12:05 PM, Duncan Sands wrote: > PS: With -fplugin-arg-dragonegg-enable-gcc-optzns the LLVM optimizers are run at > the following levels: > > Command line option LLVM optimizers run at > ------------------- ---------------------- > -O1 tiny amount of optimization > -O2 or -O3 -O1 > -O4 or -O5

Hi Pablo, I can reproduce this with the supplied IR. It is related to the use of __memcpy_chk. As far as I can see it is a bug in lli or the LLVM code generators. Can you please open a bugreport, attaching the LLVM IR. Ciao, Duncan. On 23/01/12 17:00, Pablo Barrio wrote: > Hi Duncan, >>> #include<stdio.h> >>> #include<string.h> >>> >>> int

Hi Pablo, > I came across something that seems to be a bug in the dragonegg option that > emits LLVM IR. ¿Can anybody reproduce the error, or see what's wrong? I can't reproduce this on x86-64 linux with latest LLVM+dragonegg+gcc-4.6. ¿Should I > post it somewhere else in case it's really a bug? Thanks ahead! > > With this simple program: > * > #include