similar to: [LLVMdev] Cross compiling to ARM using LLC {Help}

Dear Najem, You might want to read the llvm-prof documentation if you haven't already: http://llvm.org/cmds/llvm-prof.html. The documentation mentions a script in the utils directory that automates some of the profiling tasks for you. I suspect the way that llvm-prof works is to compile your whole program to a single LLVM bitcode file, run a transform on it, and then generate native

Hi Najem, On Mar 21, 2011, at 9:47 AM, NaJeM ErMeLeH wrote: > I'm assisting my doctor who is doing a research and he wants to use the llvm compiler, my job is to profile build the benchmarks using llvm-prof. > > What i want to know is the following > > 1- does llvm support profile feedback optimizations!? Not yet. Please see Bob's proposal:

Hello LLVM developers, I'm assisting my doctor who is doing a research and he wants to use the llvm compiler, my job is to profile build the benchmarks using llvm-prof. What i want to know is the following 1- does llvm support profile feedback optimizations!? 2- when i've used the llvm-prof it's input is an object file (not binary as other compilers) my question is how could I

Hello, I'm trying to evaluate the different register allocation algorithms on LLVM using the same level of optimizations. Using version 3.3 the current register allocators available to use are "basic, fast, greedy and pbqp". However, I'm facing the following issues: 1) I can't run basic and PBQP allocators using the command line flags of the dragonegg

Hello, I'm trying to evaluate the performance improvement of instruction scheduling on one of the inorder ARM processor, I was looking for ARM simulator and I found two (Simplescalar/ARM and SimIt-ARM) The code generated using llvm-2.9 and llvm-gcc and gcc 3.2. I used these command : $ llvm-gcc -O3 -o test1.bc -c --emit-llvm test1.c $ llc -O3 -o test1.s -march=arm test1.bc -mcpu=strongarm110

Hi, Is it normal/expected for `llc` to support a different set of targets than `lli`? I have a hello.ll on which this works: $ llc -mtriple=armv7a-linux-gnueabihf hello.ll # OK, generates hello.s But this doesn't: $ lli -mtriple=armv7a-linux-gnueabihf hello.ll # lli: error creating EE: No available targets are compatible with this triple, see -version for the available targets. I'm

Hi, Is it normal/expected for `llc` to support a different set of targets than `lli`? I have a hello.ll on which this works: $ llc -mtriple=armv7a-linux-gnueabihf hello.ll # OK, generates hello.s But this doesn't: $ lli -mtriple=armv7a-linux-gnueabihf hello.ll # lli: error creating EE: No available targets are compatible with this triple, see -version for the available targets. I'm

On Thu, Jul 23, 2015 at 10:31 AM Débora Setton Sanches < setton.debora at gmail.com> wrote: > Hi, > > Is it normal/expected for `llc` to support a different set of targets > than `lli`? > I have a hello.ll on which this works: > > $ llc -mtriple=armv7a-linux-gnueabihf hello.ll > # OK, generates hello.s > > But this doesn't: > > $ lli

s/pretty much/definitely/ Even then, “works” is too strong a word. Caveat emptor and all that. > On Jul 23, 2015, at 1:20 PM, Eric Christopher <echristo at gmail.com> wrote: > > > > On Thu, Jul 23, 2015 at 10:31 AM Débora Setton Sanches <setton.debora at gmail.com <mailto:setton.debora at gmail.com>> wrote: > Hi, > > Is it normal/expected for `llc`

Hi renato, 1. The command above is followed by the guide[ HowToCrossCompileLLVM.rst ] and I specify some path(ex. <path-to-host-bin>). 2. The including x86_64 libraries is added because of some missing libraries(ex. "error: Host compiler appears to require libatomic, but cannot find it"). As I have found that the bugs needed to dealt with is some ARM-dependent libraries, I

Hello All, I am building llvm-clang cross tool chain for arm target, after successful build for Linux host now I am now building toolchain for *arm target*. However, I am getting below error message which seems to be confusing and not getting any idea how to resolve this issue. *Command :* #CC='clang' CXX='clang++' cmake -G Ninja /home/iiita/crossbuild/llvm

Hello All, I am building llvm-clang tool chain for *arm target* by following the steps from http://clang.llvm.org/docs/CrossCompilation.html *However when I tried following cmake command for build tool chain it gives the error message :* #CC='clang' CXX='clang++' cmake -G Ninja /home/iiita/llvm-exp/llvm -DCMAKE_CROSSCOMPILING=True

Hello Peter and Lists, thanks a lot, that way it worked out! The final cmake was cmake -G "Ninja" ../llvm/projects/compiler-rt/ -DCOMPILER_RT_BUILD_BUILTINS=ON -DCOMPILER_RT_BUILD_SANITIZERS=OFF -DCOMPILER_RT_BUILD_XRAY=OFF -DCOMPILER_RT_BUILD_LIBFUZZER=OFF -DCOMPILER_RT_BUILD_PROFILE=OFF -DCMAKE_C_COMPILER=/usr/local/myclang/bin/clang -DCMAKE_AR=/usr/local/myclang/bin/llvm-ar

Hello again! Tried out the small Hello World Setup, worked as intended: root at christian-forschung-virtual-machine:/home/progs# clang -v --target=arm-linux-gnueabihf hello.c -o hello -fuse-ld=lld clang version 8.0.0 (https://git.llvm.org/git/clang.git/ a152c7a4b7ba8f4cb9532ead9a38a7121db43d50) (https://git.llvm.org/git/llvm.git/ 1959ce6f3e01241919968ac1911fd45660239d23) Target:

On 08/02/13 14:42, Renato Golin wrote: [...] > Can you paste the result of a "clang -v -mcpu=CPU file.c" on your box? I > want to see what are the arguments and the assembler/linker it's > choosing to use. What CPU are we talking about? The box itself is an Allwinner A10; armv7l. /proc/cpuinfo says it's got swp half thumb fastmult vfp edsp neon vfpv3. I've been

Hi, I think that Clang erroneously discards a function annotated with __attribute__((constructor)) when flags -Os -fno-common are given. Test case below. What do you think? Thanks. ----8<--------8<--------8<--------8<--------8<--------8<-------- $ cat ctor.c int val; static void __attribute__((constructor)) init_fn(void) { val = 1; } int main(int argc, char *argv[])

Hello again Christian, I've posted https://reviews.llvm.org/D55709 to see if we can get the documentation on how to cross-compile compiler-rt improved. I'll be out of office until next year so I may be a bit slow to respond to any follow ups. Peter On Thu, 13 Dec 2018 at 17:10, Peter Smith <peter.smith at linaro.org> wrote: > > Hello Christian, > > I've just

Hello Christian, I've put some comments inline, On Sun, 3 Feb 2019 at 13:11, Christian Richter <christian.richter at hsu-hh.de> wrote: > > Hello again, > > so after I successfully build the compiler-rt for armv6 I tried to > actually use it in compiling a small helloworld for a baremetal arm > (consisting of barehelloCLANG.c and a small io.h + io.c) , but the >

Hi, While writing http://reviews.llvm.org/D20916, I stumbled across some code affecting ARM and X86_64 environments that looks like it might be unintentional. I thought I should ask about it here since that patch has a '[mips]' tag and therefore might not be noticed by someone who knows. I've noticed that the GNUX32 and GNUEABI/GNUEABIHF environments don't make use of the sincos

Hello Christian, I'd expect that adding the library paths (-L) from gcc -v should fix the unable to find -lc, -lm but it won't fix the -lclang_rt.builtins-armv6m.a . To get clang_rt.builtins-armv6m.a you will need to cross compile compiler-rt for v6m and copy it to /usr/local/myclang/lib/clang/8.0.0/lib/baremetal . Beware that building compiler-rt for v6m does need quite a bit of fighting