similar to: [LLVMdev] Inline ASM Problem

Sorry that I have implemented nothing for it. aget is not my own project which is a public project of paralell "wget". I only want to use it as a common benchmark.  Do I need to implement anything for it? Thank you BestAndy Hi Andy, On 25/09/12 12:10, Zhoujinguo wrote: > > Thank you for replying. > > The target is "aget" which is attached. The compiling shell is

Hi Andy, On 25/09/12 12:10, Zhoujinguo wrote: > > Thank you for replying. > > The target is "aget" which is attached. The compiling shell is also attached. since this seems to be your own custom target I ask: did you implement an asm parser for your target? Best wishes, Duncan. > > Best > Andy > > > > If I use "-use-mcjit" argument, the

Hi Andy, On 25/09/12 14:19, Zhoujinguo wrote: > Sorry that I have implemented nothing for it. inline asm won't work without an asm parser, which is something that knows how to turn assembler strings like "mov %eax, %ebx" into opcodes, i.e. the numbers which, when placed into memory, cause the processor to execute the "mov %eax, %ebx" operation. After all, an

Dear Ciao, Duncan, I am using linux--Intel X86-64. Do I need to implement an asm parser for LLVM JIT myself or there exists some tools for it? Thank you. BestAndy Hi Andy, On 25/09/12 14:19, Zhoujinguo wrote: > Sorry that I have implemented nothing for it. inline asm won't work without an asm parser, which is something that knows how to turn assembler strings like "mov %eax,

Hi I am using LLVM on "aget". I have got a error message "LLVM ERROR: JIT does not support inline asm". If I use "-use-mcjit" argument, the error message changes to "LLVM ERROR: Inline asm not supported by this streamer because we don't have an asm parser for this target" What should I do? Thank you. Best Andy -------------- next part -------------- An

On Tue, Sep 25, 2012 at 09:13:10PM +0800, Zhoujinguo wrote: > Dear Ciao, Duncan, > > I am using linux--Intel X86-64. Do I need to implement an asm parser for LLVM > JIT myself or there exists some tools for it? Thank you. x86 should have the most mature ASM parser. Either file bug report or enhance the x86 ASM parser yourself, I guess. Regards, chenwj -- Wei-Ren Chen (陳韋任)

Thanks for your hint, I will try that Have A Nice Day Chia Lun -- View this message in context: http://llvm.1065342.n5.nabble.com/JIT-problem-with-thread-local-global-variable-tp49263p49273.html Sent from the LLVM - Dev mailing list archive at Nabble.com.

Hi, I'm using clang to build my project as follows: $ clang++ -ccc-host-triple arm-none-linux-gnueabi --sysroot=/usr/local/arm-none-linux-gnueabi/arm-none-linux-gnueabi/libc/ -o foo.o -emit-llvm -c foo.cpp $ clang++ -ccc-host-triple arm-none-linux-gnueabi --sysroot=/usr/local/arm-none-linux-gnueabi/arm-none-linux-gnueabi/libc/ -o main.o -emit-llvm -c main.cpp $ llvm-link foo.o main.o -o

Hi, I am instrumenting a piece of code. I want to insert a function call at the interested area, and do something in the called function which is written by myself. I have succeed on implementing the pass, and getting the instrmented code. However, I am not sure where to put this function, and what kind of linkage I should use for this function. Currently I use External linkage which is

On Thu, Nov 1, 2012 at 10:04 PM, Zhoujinguo <zhoujinguo1988 at yahoo.cn> wrote: > Hi, > > I am interested in building some large projects to get single .bc files. > Is there an easy way to do this? Or do I have to go through and understand > the whole makefile script? > This is what LLVM's "LTO" (Link Time Optimization) does, basically. This is triggered by

Hi, I also want to insert a function call at the interested area, and do something in the called function which is written by myself. First you need to determine the INSTRUCTION where you want to insert your function to. you can do this by writing some code like, for (Function::iterator BI = F.begin(), BE = F.end(); BI != BE; ++BI) for(BasicBlock::iterator II =

Hi, I am interested in building some large projects to get single .bc files. Is there an easy way to do this? Or do I have to go through and understand the whole makefile script? Thank you very much. Andy -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/attachments/20121102/109cb363/attachment.html>

Hi Andy, > I am currently using llvm to compile memcache to get the bitcode. I simply > change all the "gcc -c" command to "clang -emit-llvm -c", and output ".o" to > ".bc". And all gcc link command to llvm-ld. By these means, I successfully get > the bitcode file, but when I run it using "lli", it fails with the error: > >

Hi, I want to write a piece of code to instrument c++ programs. I have finished writing the pass, but I do not know how to get the resultant bitcode I ran OPT with the following arguments: opt -basiccg -basicaa -load /home/andy/llvm-3.0.src/Release/lib/InstTest.so -InstTest </home/andy/llvm-3.0.src/workspace/threadTest/Debug/threadTest.bc> -o=</home/andy/output/out.bc> /dev/null

Hello all, Sorry for my long post but is a very urgent situation (is required to configure 3 PDC in less then 4 hours) and i have not enough time to read and experiment so i am posting here my problem. Please read entire message (is a little bit long). I have already one PDC using samba-3.0.10-1.4E.2 (on RHEL4) which is working fine with windows 9x and xp clients, excepting one thing. All

Hi, We developed a somewhat complex Asterisk-based IVR for a client of ours. When I say 'somewhat complex' I mean that this IVR is highly integrated with a set of middle-ware applications that allow the caller to perform extensive functions while navigating the IVR. This has been working great for the past year or so. However, now the client wants to add the ability for callers to be

FYI there is now serious talk of the Linux kernel dropping support for compilers that *don't* support asm goto. On Tue, 2017-04-04 at 13:13 -0700, Matthias Braun via llvm-dev wrote: > > > On Apr 4, 2017, at 11:44 AM, John McCall via llvm-dev > > ts.llvm.org> wrote: > > > > > On Apr 4, 2017, at 2:12 PM, Matthias Braun <matze at braunis.de> > >

On Tue, 2017-04-04 at 16:26 +0000, Chandler Carruth via llvm-dev wrote: > On Tue, Apr 4, 2017 at 6:07 AM Yatsina, Marina via llvm-dev <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: > > Asm goto feature was introduces to GCC in order to optimize the > > support for tracepoints in Linux kernel (it can be used for other > > things that do nop patching). > >   > > GCC

Linux kernel is using the “asm goto” feature, other projects probably use it as well. I think it provides motivation to support it in LLVM. Regarding the complexity, I believe there is some infrastructure that we can at least partially reuse (the support for “indirectbr” instruction). My focus is adding “asm goto” support, the other things are indeed completely orthogonal and came up in bugs

Hi, I wanted to revive this issue of supporting asm goto (Bug 9295<https://bugs.llvm.org/show_bug.cgi?id=9295>). As was already proposed, the best way seems to be introducing new IR. If we're changing the IR, we should probably provide an infrastructure that solves or at least enables future support for things like: 1. MS-style inline asm jmps and goto (Bug