similar to: [LLVMdev] multiple thread jit support on windows ( win32 and win64 )

hi all, I'm trying to write an LLVM-based interpreter for a small DSL that we have. The language is very simple (essentially a calculator), but I'd like it to execute efficiently. I've been following the tutorial, and have the following code for instantiating an ExecutionEngine: #include <LLVM\ExecutionEngine\JIT.h> #include

I am having problems with my program decoding .ogg files on the Win64 platform and am wondering if this is a known issue or not. I have tried using the prebuilt .dll's, the static .lib's and building from source (1.1.3) and I get the same results. My program is being compiled on a win32 platform, but the decoder fails if I run it on a win64 system. Unfortunately this is being reported

Hi Peter, The attached patch is a workaround for the XMM misalignment issue. Basically it uses the fallback method of saving and restoring registers on the stack, which does work correctly with alignment. If I recall correctly it also doesn't save any registers unnecessarily, but I could be wrong about that. Anyway, it's hack, but if all you want for now is to be able to work with Win64

Hello, I think I've found a bug in the calling convention support for X86-64/ Win64. It doesn't correctly save and restore the XMM registers in the function prolog/epilog. (The problem only exists on Win64, since Linux and Mac OS use calling convention in which these registers are volatile and not callee-saved.) X86RegisterInfo::getCalleeSavedRegs() when called for a Win64

Thanks, Anton! I didn't know about exceptions like _Complex that you mentioned. The only way to support them is to place the burden of correct parameter passing on the front-end, I understand that now. So, today I created a new transformation pass that makes sure that LLVM IR, which works alright with the default Win32 calling conventions, also plays nice with Win64 code within the limited

+LLVMdev On Aug 4, 2012, at 9:45 AM, João Matos wrote: > Charles Davis did a lot of work on Win64 SEH support in LLVM, check commits r131652-r132880. > > As I haven't tested it yet, what exactly is broken? It's not finished yet. All the stuff for assembly code that uses Win64 EH is done, but not the code-gen-side stuff (cf. Win64Exception class in CodeGen). I was about to

On Thu, Jul 30, 2009 at 5:32 PM, Peter Shugalev<peter at shugalev.com> wrote: > Hello! > > I've just tried generating Win64 code and the result is not that good. > > First of all, XMM registers are saved without reason to do so. Not only > this slows the performance but leads to random crashes too. XMMs are > stored to the stack with MOVAPS instruction which requires

In summary we have no less than six patches required to support Win64 SEH MinGW. The first five could be committed after review and LGTM but the last one also requires Ray Donnelly approval. Please comment in the Phabricator so the comments would be kept in context. 'unreachable' trap http://reviews.llvm.org/D3417 Win64 SEH (LLVM) http://reviews.llvm.org/D3418 Win64 SEH (clang)

Hi Chandler, There were five SEH releated patches posted in two threads in the last days. Two different patches in Martell e-mail starting this thread: the win64 seh (llvm) and the register names Three more related SEH patches in another thread: one for win64 seh clang, one for MinGW toolchain and another for unreachable prologue. To clarify and allow proper reviews for the different patches I

What host triple should I be using to specifically target x86_64 / Win64? I notice there is no Win64 in the OSType enum, but there is Win32. And yet I know llvm can target Win64, right? -- Eric Niebler BoostPro Computing http://www.boostpro.com

I have an old conferencing app that uses theora and I'm building it for win64. libthora 1.1 builds just fine, but libtheora 1.0 has errors related to assembly code when building for x64. I've tried using 1.1, but the video does not look right -- the clients all generate their own first 3 packets instead of sending them over the network since they assume they are all on the same version

Great! Are there other issues I should be aware of? Félix Le 2010-11-25 à 07:43:23, Anton Korobeynikov a écrit : > Hello Felix > >> I have a project in mind that involves using the JIT for a few targets (x86 >> and x86_64 processors on Mac OS, Linux and Windows). However, there is an >> open bug that says LLVM generates incorrect code for Win64. >> Eli's last

So we can using FFI to talk with libclang.dll without compiling LLVM under Win32. -- 此致 礼 罗勇刚 Yours sincerely, Yonggang Luo -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/attachments/20180417/8eb752d1/attachment.html>

Hello guys, I have a project in mind that involves using the JIT for a few targets (x86 and x86_64 processors on Mac OS, Linux and Windows). However, there is an open bug that says LLVM generates incorrect code for Win64. Eli's last comment on the bug, however, says that it appears to be fixed. I don't have a Win64 box to test it. Can someone confirm that it now works (or still

Hi again, Can anyone tell me about the state of Win64 exceptions? I've noticed that there are a good few related patches since the release of 3.1. Is it working now? Is it likely 3.2 will support Win64 exceptions? Cheers. - Manu -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL:

On 30-Jul-09, at 8:54 PM, Eli Friedman wrote: > On Thu, Jul 30, 2009 at 5:32 PM, Peter Shugalev<peter at shugalev.com> > wrote: >> Though the most problematic stuff is the lack of 'shadow zone' >> support >> in Win64 ABI. Or maybe I haven't figured out how to turn this on. In >> Win64 any function can treat 32 bytes of stack (RSP+08h..RSP+28h

Hello Felix > I have a project in mind that involves using the JIT for a few targets (x86 > and x86_64 processors on Mac OS, Linux and Windows). However, there is an > open bug that says LLVM generates incorrect code for Win64. > Eli's last comment on the bug, however, says that it appears to be fixed. > I don't have a Win64 box to test it. Can someone confirm that it now

Nobody? Is this basically dead? Won't happen? In progress? :/ On 12 September 2012 18:53, Manu <turkeyman at gmail.com> wrote: > Hi again, > > Can anyone tell me about the state of Win64 exceptions? > I've noticed that there are a good few related patches since the release > of 3.1. Is it working now? > Is it likely 3.2 will support Win64 exceptions? > >

Hi, Similar questions have come up before on the list and elsewhere but I haven't found a solution yet. winbuilder's install.out shows data.table's .c files compiled with -O3 on Win32 but -O2 on Win64. The same happens on R-Forge. I gather that some packages don't work with -O3 so the default is -O2. I've tried this in data.table's Makevars (entire contents) : ====

Stefanus Du Toit wrote: > On 30-Jul-09, at 8:54 PM, Eli Friedman wrote: >> On Thu, Jul 30, 2009 at 5:32 PM, Peter Shugalev<peter at shugalev.com> >> wrote: >>> Though the most problematic stuff is the lack of 'shadow zone' >>> support >>> in Win64 ABI. Or maybe I haven't figured out how to turn this on. In >>> Win64 any