similar to: [LLVMdev] Command line options being put in Target backend libraries

It is definitely an issue, since the command line options are basically globals, which fundamentally goes against LLVM's library-based design. -- Sean Silva On Fri, Jul 26, 2013 at 7:03 PM, Shankar Easwaran <shankare at codeaurora.org>wrote: > Hi, > > I see a lot of command line options being set in Target backend libraries. > The problem with that is if a third party

Hi, Thanks for your reply, Sean. I think the reason users arent complaining about this is because, users dont link with target libraries. This is going to be a major cleanup too as there have been a lot of options defined across all the targets. A simple find/grep shows you a total of 98 options defined in libraries. Thanks Shankar Easwaran On 8/23/2013 1:41 PM, Sean Silva wrote: > It

----- Original Message ----- > Hi, > > Thanks for your reply, Sean. > > I think the reason users arent complaining about this is because, > users > dont link with target libraries. > > This is going to be a major cleanup too as there have been a lot of > options defined across all the targets. > > A simple find/grep shows you a total of 98 options defined in

On 10/7/2014 4:10 PM, Nick Kledzik wrote: > Shankar, > > Can you give provide a scenario where you want this? I’m not sure what you want here. a) LLVM could be built just for one target(LLVM_TARGETS_TO_BUILD) b) With LTO this case might happen more often, where an user would have compiled LLVM just for one architecture and lld would support other architectures that LLVM would not

On 4/4/2014 3:46 AM, David Chisnall wrote: > On 3 Apr 2014, at 20:49, Shankar Easwaran <shankare at codeaurora.org> wrote: > >> b) I am not planning to write a demangler. I was planning on using abi::__cxx_demangle if there was one available and the first character in the symbol was a _. >> If MSVC was defined, we would use the Undecorate API. > The demangler that

Hi Nick, Thanks for your reply. On 8/23/2013 3:40 PM, Nick Kledzik wrote: > > These are the changes I plan to make, and some questions that I have > > a) Define a new contentType for DefinedAtoms to say 'Expression' > b) Create a new class ExprnAtom derived from DefinedAtom > c) The expression could also contain various functions that could be set in the expression, how

Hi Dan, The other messages, need to go to stdout as well. Using stderr to output for a switch like --verbose is wrong in my opinion. On 8/14/2013 4:44 PM, Dan Gohman wrote: > Would it be appropriate for lld's other output to go to standard error > instead of standard output, since standard output may be used for YAML > output? > > Dan > > On Wed, Aug 14, 2013 at 12:53

On Mon, Oct 14, 2013 at 8:41 PM, Michael Spencer <bigcheesegs at gmail.com>wrote: > On Wed, Oct 9, 2013 at 11:23 AM, Shankar Easwaran <shankare at codeaurora.org > > wrote: > >> Hi, >> >> We have a whole bunch of readers(we would have some more too), and was >> thinking if we should have a vector of Readers, and have a function >> isMyFormat in

On 10/4/2013 11:16 PM, Michael Spencer wrote: > On Fri, Oct 4, 2013 at 8:50 PM, Shankar Easwaran <shankare at codeaurora.org>wrote: > >> Hi, >> >> It is needed that lld verifies the input to the linker. >> >> For example : a x86 ELF file can be given to lld when the target is >> x86_64. Similiarly with other flavors. >> >> I was thinking

+ Nick Rui, Does PECOFF writer need the filename in the writer as well, I am not sure if linker scripts are supported with PECOFF though. If PECOFF also needs it, I think it makes sense to store the filename in the Atom as the native format needs to store that information. The only option for the ELF writer to know this information is to use References if other flavors dont need the

Does it build with libstdc++? I've got this with fresh clang, -std=c++11: In file included from ../projects/lld/lib/ReaderWriter/ELF/./SectionChunks.h:19: In file included from ../projects/lld/include/lld/Core/Parallel.h:28: In file included from /usr/lib/gcc/x86_64-linux-gnu/4.6/../../../../include/c++/4.6/condition_variable:38:

Yes, the Group is to represent --start-group,--end-group. So the group here will be contained in the linker Input as a vector of lld::files (foo.a, bar.a). thanks Shankar Easwaran On 9/4/2013 3:59 PM, Rui Ueyama wrote: > The first question is that Group is to represent --start-group/--end-group? > > If I understand your proposal correctly, here's the thing: if file is not > in

On 10/14/2013 8:20 PM, Sean Silva wrote: > On Mon, Oct 14, 2013 at 8:41 PM, Michael Spencer <bigcheesegs at gmail.com>wrote: > >> On Wed, Oct 9, 2013 at 11:23 AM, Shankar Easwaran <shankare at codeaurora.org >>> wrote: >>> Hi, >>> >>> We have a whole bunch of readers(we would have some more too), and was >>> thinking if we should

Hi, We have a whole bunch of readers(we would have some more too), and was thinking if we should have a vector of Readers, and have a function isMyFormat in each of them. Any reader that knows to handle, goes ahead and parses the file. On a side note, we currently use .objtxt as an figure out if the file is a YAML file or not. I have added FIXME's in the code, if we could some kind of

On 11/04/2013 11:15 AM, Eric Christopher wrote: > > > > On Mon, Nov 4, 2013 at 11:05 AM, Shankar Easwaran > <shankare at codeaurora.org <mailto:shankare at codeaurora.org>> wrote: > > Hi, > > I was looking at the ARM ABI > docs(http://infocenter.arm.__com/help/topic/com.arm.doc.__ihi0044e/IHI0044E_aaelf.pdf >

Ping ? Do you think that we need to have an API in LinkingContext to return the next ordinal available, so that files created by passes can be assigned ordinals ? Thanks Shankar Easwaran On 10/6/2013 11:07 PM, Shankar Easwaran wrote: > In addition I think the LayoutPass std::stable_sort be replaced with > std::sort as total ordering is guaranteed as each File would get an >

Hi Dan, lld takes a -emit-yaml option, which emits the intermediate representation(atoms) in YAML form. By default output goes to stdout, the user can control it by using the -o option too. The way its handled is, similiar to this piece of pseudo-code if (dash_o_option) outputFile = dash_o_option->value() else outputFile = "-" When lld tries to mix things that go to

On 9/8/2013 11:48 PM, Chandler Carruth wrote: > On Sun, Sep 8, 2013 at 9:29 PM, Shankar Easwaran <shankare at codeaurora.org>wrote: > >> Do you know if llvm itself gets tested as a complete build with the >> fsanitize options ? >> >> Enabling tsan seems to be a good idea too. >> > We test it very regularly with all of the sanitizers. We've not been

On Mon, Oct 14, 2013 at 11:33 PM, Shankar Easwaran <shankare at codeaurora.org>wrote: > On 10/14/2013 8:20 PM, Sean Silva wrote: > >> On Mon, Oct 14, 2013 at 8:41 PM, Michael Spencer <bigcheesegs at gmail.com >> >wrote: >> >> On Wed, Oct 9, 2013 at 11:23 AM, Shankar Easwaran < >>> shankare at codeaurora.org >>> >>>>

Could you elaborate a bit about the issue that you are trying to solve with this suggestion? On Tue, Apr 1, 2014 at 9:27 PM, Shankar Easwaran <shankare at codeaurora.org>wrote: > Hi Nick, Bigcheese, > > Resurrecting a old thread. > > Now since we have a Registry that models Readers, do we want to have a > function in the Registry that evaluates whether a file should be