similar to: [LLVMdev] Lowering Atomic Load to Acquire and Load

Hi all, I was interested in trying out the Xray profiling component in LLVM and was trying to compile a C program with Clang with Xray flags. Unfortunately, I keep getting a linker error everytime I try to compile the C program with Clang. However, the error goes away when I try to compile the same C program with Clang++ with -xc++ flag. Searching around for this issue, looks like somebody has

I updated the patch to read a call graph from a text file. I tested it with the attached call.txt from lld linking chromium. Unfortunately the resulting lld doesn't seem any faster. One thing I noticed is that the most used symbols seem to be at the end of the file. In any case, can you add tests and send the lld patch for review? Thanks, Rafael On 31 July 2017 at 15:19, Davide Italiano

On 5 Jun 2017, at 15:17, Jonathan Roelofs via llvm-dev <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: > > On 6/5/17 5:17 AM, Dmitry Golovin via llvm-dev wrote: >> I'm trying to build LLVM, Clang, LLD, compiler-rt, libc++, libc++abi and libunwind with musl-based toolchain. >> >> The configuration is the following: >> >> LIBCXX_HAS_MUSL_LIBC=ON >>

A rebased version of the lld patch is attached. Cheers, Rafael On 31 July 2017 at 15:11, Rafael Avila de Espindola <rafael.espindola at gmail.com> wrote: > Tobias Edler von Koch <tobias at codeaurora.org> writes: > >> Hi Rafael, >> >> On 07/31/2017 04:20 PM, Rafael Avila de Espindola via llvm-dev wrote: >>> However, do we need to start with

I'm trying to build LLVM, Clang, LLD, compiler-rt, libc++, libc++abi and libunwind with musl-based toolchain. The configuration is the following: LIBCXX_HAS_MUSL_LIBC=ON LIBCXX_HAS_GCC_S_LIB=OFF CLANG_DEFAULT_CXX_STDLIB=libc++ CLANG_DEFAULT_LINKER=lld CLANG_DEFAULT_RTLIB=compiler-rt LLVM_DEFAULT_TARGET_TRIPLE=x86_64-pc-linux-musl LLVM_TARGET_ARCH=x86_64

Hi, The phase of instruction combine cannot handle the instruction %4 = select i1 %tobool.i, metadata !12, metadata !10 generated by the phase of CFG simplification and the compiler generates an assertion failure. I wonder whether this is valid LLVM IR: %4 = select i1 %tobool.i, metadata !12, metadata !10 Before CFGSimplify cond.true.i: ; preds = %entry

Hi! before InstCombine (llvm::createInstructionCombiningPass()) I have a trunc from i8 to i1 and then a select: %45 = load i8* @myGlobal, align 1 %tobool = trunc i8 %45 to i1 %cond = select i1 %tobool, float 1.000000e+00, float -1.000000e+00 after instCombine I have: %29 = load i8* @myGlobal, align 1 %30 = and i8 %29, 1 %tobool = icmp ne i8 %30, 0 %cond = select i1 %tobool, float 1.000000e+00,

Hi Dimitry, I do not particularly need to build libc++ from the package. Is the name of the package's libc++, libcxx, because this is where the installation starts finding undefined references, during linking CXX shared library ../../../lib/libc++.so. Please check below the first part of the log when the first error appear, I omited repeating results. Furthermore, the undefined references are

I have the following simplified llvm ir, which basically returns value based on the first value of a constant array. ---- ; ModuleID = 'simple_ir3.txt' @f.b = constant [1 x i32] [i32 1], align 4 ; constant array with value 1 at the first element define void @f(i32* nocapture %l0) { entry: %fc_ = alloca [1 x i32] %f.b.v = load [1 x i32]* @f.b store [1 x i32] %f.b.v, [1 x

>> Hi! >> >> before InstCombine (llvm::createInstructionCombiningPass()) I have >> a trunc from i8 to i1 and then a select: >> >> %45 = load i8* @myGlobal, align 1 >> %tobool = trunc i8 %45 to i1 >> %cond = select i1 %tobool, float 1.000000e+00, float -1.000000e+00 >> >> after instCombine I have: >> >> %29 = load i8*

To reproduce the issue, please use the command line "opt -simplifycfg filename". target datalayout = "e-m:e-i64:64-f80:128-n8:16:32:64-S128" target triple = "x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu" %struct.G = type { %struct.ordered_index_node*, i32 } %struct.ordered_index_node = type { %struct.B, %struct.F } %struct.B = type { i32 } %struct.F = type { i32*, i32* }

I came in to an email this morning that said basically the same thing for the reduced example we were looking at. However, the original IR it came from (before hand reduction) had the data layout set correctly, so there's probably still *something* going on. It's just not what I thought at first. :) Philip On 09/10/2014 02:26 AM, Roel Jordans wrote: > Looking at the -debug

On Aug 11, 2008, at 2:02 PM, Benedict Gaster wrote: > We would like to develop a code generator using LLVM for a target > language that does not support conditional branches and in fact only > supports structured control flow, eg. If and while. What's the difference between an "if" and a conditional branch? > As far as I can tell that the problem with doing this in

On Dec 27, 2011, at 5:09 AM, Jochen Wilhelmy wrote: > Hi! > > before InstCombine (llvm::createInstructionCombiningPass()) I have > a trunc from i8 to i1 and then a select: > > %45 = load i8* @myGlobal, align 1 > %tobool = trunc i8 %45 to i1 > %cond = select i1 %tobool, float 1.000000e+00, float -1.000000e+00 > > after instCombine I have: > > %29 = load i8*

Hi Ioannis, Just delete the projects/libcxx directory, then rebuild from scratch. You should only need to checkout llvm (in the top level directory) and cfe (into the tools/clang subdirectory). -Dimitry > On 29 Mar 2016, at 00:08, Ioannis Koukoulis <i.g.koukoulis at gmail.com> wrote: > > Hi Dimitry, > > I do not particularly need to build libc++ from the package. Is the

We would like to develop a code generator using LLVM for a target language that does not support conditional branches and in fact only supports structured control flow, eg. If and while. As far as I can tell that the problem with doing this in LLVM today, is that it does not support these high-level constructs and instead all control flow is implemented as branches. It is ³fairly²

Hello, What follows is my attempt to describe how poison works. Let me know what you think. -- David # LLVM Poison Semantics Poison is an LLVM concept which exists solely to enable further optimization of LLVM IR. The exact behavior of poison has been, to say the least, confusing for users, researchers and engineers working with LLVM. This document hopes to clear up some of the confusion

I think Chris is saying that the and is necessary because with your i1 trunc you're ignoring all of the high bits. The and implements that. If you don't want this behavior, don't generate the trunc in the first place and just compare the full width to zero. Reid On Wed, Dec 28, 2011 at 6:45 AM, Jochen Wilhelmy <j.wilhelmy at arcor.de>wrote: > > >> Hi! >

Hi, Comments inline. Ben On 12/08/2008 03:14, "Owen Anderson" <resistor at mac.com> wrote: >> We would like to develop a code generator using LLVM for a target language >> that does not support conditional branches and in fact only supports >> structured control flow, eg. If and while. What's the difference between an "if" and a conditional

Hi Dimitry, this definitely worked. I am passed by the linking errors regarding libc++ or similar. My build stopped now at 95% while linking a clang extra, I am not pretty sure which because i do not have my laptop, possible the clang-rename, if such exists. No undefined references here, however, my hdd's free space run out, so this might be the cause. I have to move or expand now, alas!! The