similar to: [LLVMdev] Tail calls (TCO) in PNaCL | PNaCl Bitcode reference manual

On 2013-07-30 22:11, Eli Bendersky wrote: > we've published an initial version of the PNaCl bitcode reference > manual online - > http://www.chromium.org/nativeclient/pnacl/bitcode-abi. The PNaCl > bitcode is a restricted subset of LLVM IR. > > Any comments would be most welcome. Hi Eli, I appreciate you for opening the process for input and comments. One question stood

On Wed, Jul 31, 2013 at 11:55 PM, Travis Cross <tc at travislists.com> wrote: > On 2013-07-30 22:11, Eli Bendersky wrote: > > we've published an initial version of the PNaCl bitcode reference > > manual online - > > http://www.chromium.org/nativeclient/pnacl/bitcode-abi. The PNaCl > > bitcode is a restricted subset of LLVM IR. > > > > Any comments

On 1 August 2013 00:11, Travis Cross <tc at travislists.com> wrote: > On 2013-07-30 22:11, Eli Bendersky wrote: > > we've published an initial version of the PNaCl bitcode reference > > manual online - > > http://www.chromium.org/nativeclient/pnacl/bitcode-abi. The PNaCl > > bitcode is a restricted subset of LLVM IR. > > > > Any comments would be

Hi Mark, On 2013-08-02 04:11, Mark Seaborn wrote: > That note in the documentation seems to be incorrect, because LLVM > will do tail call optimisations on at least x86 when using the "ccc" > calling convention. For example: > > $ cat tail_call1.c > void foo(int arg); > void bar(int arg) { > foo(arg); > } > > $ clang tail_call1.c -S -o - -O2 >

Hello, Following an earlier email ( http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/pipermail/llvmdev/2013-June/063010.html), we've published an initial version of the PNaCl bitcode reference manual online - http://www.chromium.org/nativeclient/pnacl/bitcode-abi. The PNaCl bitcode is a restricted subset of LLVM IR. The reference manual is quite terse, so for the bigger picture I'll repost links to the design

Hi Eli, Recently, I proposed some changes to LLVM to do more lowering of illegal types (like i128 or i17) and other things within the LLVM IR layer, and the proposal was roundly rejected by the LLVM community: http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/pipermail/llvmdev/2013-April/061567.html PNaCl is essentially doing what my proposal described. How do you expect to reconcile the community's desire to avoid

Is it possible to use PNaCl infrastructure (i.e. translation and execution in a sandbox) without a Chrome ? I mean a something like a standalone VM like Java or Mono/C#. Dmitri Am 18.06.2013 17:22, schrieb Eli Bendersky: > Hello, > > [The first paragraph is safe to skip if you already know what PNaCl is.] > The Portable Native Client (PNaCl) project is a toolchain for producing

Hello, [The first paragraph is safe to skip if you already know what PNaCl is.] The Portable Native Client (PNaCl) project is a toolchain for producing portable bitcode from C and C++ code and running in securely and efficiently on the web via Native Client. For more details see this presentation from the last Google I/O: https://developers.google.com/events/io/sessions/325679543and

Am 19.06.2013 18:01, schrieb JF Bastien: > > From the provided documentation I understood that in memory data > structures of a PNaCl program are incompatible to the host program > because ABIs are different (e.g. PNaCl pointers are always 32-bit > even when running on x86_64 platform). > So PNaCl program can't access any data structures of the host >

> The document is available as a PDF here: > https://docs.google.com/a/chromium.org/viewer?a=v&pid=sites&srcid=Y2hyb21pdW0ub3JnfGRldnxneDo0OWYwZjVkYWFjOWNjODE1 > > And in text here: > https://sites.google.com/a/chromium.org/dev/nativeclient/pnacl/stability-of-the-pnacl-bitcode-abi First, sorry for jumping in an old thread. I had this marked but had not been able to read it

> From the provided documentation I understood that in memory data > structures of a PNaCl program are incompatible to the host program because > ABIs are different (e.g. PNaCl pointers are always 32-bit even when running > on x86_64 platform). > So PNaCl program can't access any data structures of the host program > directly. The only communication way is by using syscalls,

From the provided documentation I understood that in memory data structures of a PNaCl program are incompatible to the host program because ABIs are different (e.g. PNaCl pointers are always 32-bit even when running on x86_64 platform). So PNaCl program can't access any data structures of the host program directly. The only communication way is by using syscalls, but the document does not

On 18 June 2013 15:27, Dmitri Rubinstein <dmitri.rubinstein at googlemail.com>wrote: > Is it possible to use PNaCl infrastructure (i.e. translation and execution > in a sandbox) without a Chrome ? > > I mean a something like a standalone VM like Java or Mono/C#. > Yes. The NaCl tool 'sel_ldr' will run a program inside a sandbox outside of the web browser. We do a

On 18 June 2013 15:08, Sean Silva <silvas at purdue.edu> wrote: > On Tue, Jun 18, 2013 at 2:06 PM, Eli Bendersky <eliben at google.com> wrote: > >> On Tue, Jun 18, 2013 at 12:03 PM, Sean Silva <silvas at purdue.edu> wrote: >> >>> Instead of a blacklist, why not a whitelist? Given the size of LangRef, >>> you're bound to leave something out

Hi David, Thank you for your reply. In fact, my question originally came from the google native client. I thought that the bitcode can be shared among the different targets as it inherently is. Therefore, I used the clang to generate the bitcode to prove that my thought is right, and I supposed that the different bitcode caused from the different versions of libraries before. Thanks for the

Check out PNaCL http://www.chromium.org/nativeclient/pnacl Cheers, Sam Sam Parker Research Student Electronic Systems Design Group Loughborough University UK ________________________________________ From: llvmdev-bounces at cs.uiuc.edu [llvmdev-bounces at cs.uiuc.edu] on behalf of mindmachine at free.fr [mindmachine at free.fr] Sent: 17 December 2013 14:03 To: llvmdev at cs.uiuc.edu Subject:

Thanks, I hadn't heard about PNaCl, it's very interesting. I'm currently swimming in http://llvm.org/docs/ trying to learn more about LLVM-IR... Selon JF Bastien <jfb at google.com>: > We (PNaCl team) are in the process of removing older documentation, > this is probably more accurate: > https://developers.google.com/native-client/dev/ > > On Tue, Dec 17,

Albert Graef wrote: > Jeffrey Yasskin wrote: >> Try batch compiling with the large code model. (llc -code-model=large) >> If that also causes tail calls to break, then I did something wrong in >> fixing far calls in the JIT. > > Jeffrey, I took a closer look at this now, and all the TCO-related > weirdness I see in the Pure interpreter is indeed related to your commit

We (PNaCl team) are in the process of removing older documentation, this is probably more accurate: https://developers.google.com/native-client/dev/ On Tue, Dec 17, 2013 at 6:50 AM, Sam Parker <S.Parker3 at lboro.ac.uk> wrote: > Check out PNaCL > http://www.chromium.org/nativeclient/pnacl > > Cheers, > Sam > > Sam Parker > Research Student > Electronic Systems

On Wed, Jun 1, 2011 at 12:53 PM, Henry Mason <thefridgeowl at gmail.com> wrote: > This is pretty much what's happening with Portable Native Client, right? > > http://www.chromium.org/nativeclient/pnacl > > See also the first presentation from the November LLVM meeting: http://llvm.org/devmtg/2010-11/ PNaCl fixes data layout to be just "portable enough" to cover