similar to: [LLVMdev] how to use lllvm interpreter api ?

Hi everyone ! I am very new to LLVM and intent to use it in a research project. I have a problem with the interpreter: I have a simple compiler that generates LLVM bitcode, JIT it and execute it, and it works very well. Now I would like to execute it using the interpreter. And I get a segfault. Here is the code : // This code JIT the function and executes it llvm::InitializeNativeTarget();

In my case, I am working on a posix regular expression library that uses LLVM to execute a regular expression. Each regular expression is a very small sets of code and is faster to interpret than to JIT then execute. I wanted to JIT only when the regular expression is executed more than 20 times. The benchmarks I have run show that my library is amzingly fast to execute a regular expression

Helps to send to list: On Tue, Nov 2, 2010 at 1:00 PM, OvermindDL1 <overminddl1 at gmail.com> wrote: > On Tue, Nov 2, 2010 at 12:51 PM, Salomon Brys <salomon.brys at gmail.com> wrote: >> Hi everyone ! >> I am very new to LLVM and intent to use it in a research project. >> I have a problem with the interpreter: I have a simple compiler that >> generates LLVM

Hello everyone, i’m using LLVM (updated to 3.1 after seeing that bug, but it’s the same with 3.0) for running a bitcode on a C++ program, and Clang for compiling it. My code work perfectly, as expected on x64, but crash on x86. I’m on Windows 7 x64 and LLVM + Clang was compiled using Visual Studio 2010 (tested in both Release and Debug build). Project was make using CMake. Here is my code:

Hi Óscar, Thank you for your prompt reply. Unfortunately, I still need more guidance as using the Demo page to generate C++ code didn't result in a global variable being used. Basically, I'm following your advice to use a LoadInst: Value *v = new LoadInst(result, "", theBasicBlock); Function *myfn = cast<Function>(v); I was not sure how I could get a BasicBlock for the

Hi Salomon, please don't forget to reply to the list too (I've CC'd the list). > I don't think my code is doing anything worng... No, it looks fine to me, and the interpreter certainly supports this. That suggests that the value of %str is not being transmitted to the function right. If it is getting the wrong pointer value, that would explain why it barfs. Ciao, Duncan.

Hi, I want to use a function defined in c(++)-code from code generated by llvm. For this I use ExecutionEngine.addGlobalMapping(). I started with the JIT execution engine and everything worked, then I switched to the interpreter engine and it stopped working, but only if compiled on a Linux system. More precisely it works if I use llvm 3.8.1 + gcc (Linux) + JIT llvm 3.8.0 + mingw-gcc

In my main function after generate the code and before start the execution via JIT I do this: ExecutionEngine *EE = EngineBuilder(M).create(); string str = EE->getTargetData()->getStringRepresentation(); str[0] = 'e'; M->setDataLayout(str); if (verifyModule(*M)) { errs() << argv[0] << ": Error building the

Dear All I'm trying to create storeInst using StoreInst *SI = new StoreInst(val, AI, BB); AI is an alloca instruction previously created, BB is the basicBlock I want to put instructionsi in. Val is the value to store. I've created val from a genericValue like this: Value* val = ConstantInt::get(getGlobalContext(), Result.IntVal); Result is the genericValue However I keep getting

Hi, Our DSL LLVM IR emitted code (optimized with -O3 kind of IR ==> IR passes) runs slower when executed with the LLVM 3.3 JIT, compared to what we had with LLVM 3.1. What could be the reason? I tried to play with TargetOptions without any success… Here is the kind of code we use to allocate the JIT: EngineBuilder builder(fResult->fModule);

Hi, I am trying to run an LLVM analysis on a C++ program that calls qsort(), using the LLVM interpreter (lli --force-interpreter). The code is the qsort_large.c file in the MiBench benchmark suite. If I comment the qsort() call, the execution works fine. If I uncomment the qsort() call, I run into a segmentation fault error as follows: 0  lli             0x0000000000d35c6f 1  lli        

Hi, I am trying to run an LLVM analysis on a C++ program that calls qsort(), using the LLVM interpreter (lli --force-interpreter). The code is the qsort_large.c file in the MiBench benchmark suite. If I comment the qsort() call, the execution works fine. If I uncomment the qsort() call, I run into a segmentation fault error as follows: 0 lli 0x0000000000d35c6f 1 lli

On Thu, Jul 18, 2013 at 9:07 AM, Stéphane Letz <letz at grame.fr> wrote: > Hi, > > Our DSL LLVM IR emitted code (optimized with -O3 kind of IR ==> IR passes) runs slower when executed with the LLVM 3.3 JIT, compared to what we had with LLVM 3.1. What could be the reason? > > I tried to play with TargetOptions without any success… > > Here is the kind of code we use to

Valery, Your JIT sample program has been added to projects/HowToUseJIT. I have defaulted the license to the standard UIUC license. Let me know if that's not okay and I'll fix it. If you continue to work on this (providing a command line option to use either interpreter or JIT would be nice), please provide patches against these files and I'll commit them for you. Here's the

I'm trying to turn some GenericValues into Constants in the interpreter using code like this, in a switch statement: case Type::IntTyID: SI = ConstantSInt::get(FB->getType(), ArgVals[i].IntVal); params.push_back(UI); UI->dump(); //for testing break; FB is a Function::ArgumentListType::iterator ArgVals is a std::vector<GenericValue> the switch

On Mon, 9 Aug 2004, Reid Spencer wrote: > Attached are three files: "valery.cpp" which contains your original, "reid.cpp" > which contains corrections to most of the FIXME items and "diffs" which shows > the differences between them. The differences should be instructive on what to > do. You were really, really close .. just a few details changing. The

Valery, That's pretty cute actually. Do you want this "brilliant" :) example in the cvs repository? I'd be happy to put it in. Reid. Valery A.Khamenya wrote: > Hi LLVMers, > > the example attached I have used to prove that JIT and some visible > optimizations are really invoked. > > Proved OK. I got 30% speed-up in comparison to gcc 3.3.3 >

Why are you changing the data layout to be little-endian? Joey On 28 May 2012 10:13, Santos Merino <santitox at hotmail.es> wrote: > In my main function after generate the code and before start the execution > via > JIT I do this: > > ExecutionEngine *EE = EngineBuilder(M).create(); > string str = > EE->getTargetData()->getStringRepresentation();

I think I might have found a bug in the exection engine's 'constants folding'. Basically APInt's parameters are the wrong way round. Line 577 for lib/ExecutionEngine/ExecutionEngine.cpp :- case Instruction::PtrToInt: { GenericValue GV = getConstantValue(Op0); uint32_t PtrWidth = TD->getPointerSizeInBits(); GV.IntVal = APInt(PtrWidth,

On second thought, the makefiles don't (easily) allow this do they? You can only build one program per directory. Were you suggesting that you wanted me to move the entire directories under a "small examples" directory? Reid. Chris Lattner wrote: > On Tue, 17 Aug 2004, Reid Spencer wrote: > > >>That's pretty cute actually. Do you want this