Displaying 20 results from an estimated 6000 matches similar to: "[LLVMdev] [RFC] Moving OnDiskHashTable from clang to LLVM"
2014 Mar 22
3
[LLVMdev] [RFC] Moving OnDiskHashTable from clang to LLVM
Rafael Avila de Espindola <rafael.espindola at gmail.com> writes:
>> On Mar 22, 2014, at 1:31, Justin Bogner <mail at justinbogner.com> wrote:
>> Also, the header includes a "clang::io" namespace with some operations
>> for reading and writing little endian files. Should these be directly
>> renamed to "llvm::io", or would something like
2014 Mar 24
2
[LLVMdev] [RFC] Moving OnDiskHashTable from clang to LLVM
Rafael Espíndola <rafael.espindola at gmail.com> writes:
>> They're obviously related. Endian.h defines types like ulittle32, which
>> DTRT when read and written from memory, whereas clang::io has functions
>> to read and write memory like so:
>>
>> void Emit32(raw_ostream& Out, uint32_t V);
>> uint32_t ReadLE32(const unsigned char
2014 Apr 16
3
[LLVMdev] RFC: Binary format for instrumentation based profiling data
On Fri, Mar 28, 2014 at 1:33 PM, Justin Bogner <mail at justinbogner.com>wrote:
> Chandler Carruth <chandlerc at google.com> writes:
> > Format 2
> > --------
> >
> > This format should be efficient to read and preferably reasonably
> > compact. We'll convert from format 1 to format 2 using llvm-profdata,
> > and clang
2014 Mar 24
4
[LLVMdev] RFC: Binary format for instrumentation based profiling data
On Sat, Mar 22, 2014 at 1:18 AM, Justin Bogner <mail at justinbogner.com>wrote:
> Chandler Carruth <chandlerc at google.com> writes:
> > I think it would be worthwhile to consider the alternative of having
> > the profile library write out data files in a format which is
> > essentially "always" transformed by a post-processing tool before
> >
2014 Mar 13
5
[LLVMdev] RFC: Binary format for instrumentation based profiling data
Instrumentation-based profiling data is generated by instrumented
binaries through library functions in compiler-rt, and read by the clang
frontend to feed PGO.
The current data format is a naive textual format.
The files consist of a number of counters for each function in a
program.
Use cases
=========
There are a few use cases that drive our requirements:
A. Looking up the counters for a
2017 Aug 24
3
Building LLVM's fuzzers
George Karpenkov <ekarpenkov at apple.com> writes:
> Should -DCMAKE_CXX_COMPILER be also specified?
CMake is smart enough to infer that from C_COMPILER:
% grep CMAKE_CXX_COMPILER CMakeCache.txt
CMAKE_CXX_COMPILER:FILEPATH=/Users/bogner/llvm-lkgc/bin/clang++
>> On Aug 24, 2017, at 11:29 AM, Justin Bogner <mail at justinbogner.com> wrote:
>>
>> (kcc, george:
2015 Jul 21
2
[LLVMdev] Problem with InsertPointGuard ABI?
On Tue, Jul 21, 2015 at 6:30 PM Justin Bogner <mail at justinbogner.com> wrote:
> Paweł Bylica <chfast at gmail.com> writes:
> > On Tue, Jul 21, 2015 at 5:55 PM Justin Bogner <mail at justinbogner.com>
> wrote:
> >
> > Paweł Bylica <chfast at gmail.com> writes:
> > > I can confirm that the issue has been caused by NDEBUG flag.
>
2015 May 22
2
[LLVMdev] GCC compatibility code coverage issue .
Hi Justin ,
Thank you for the confirmation and we would like to know that ,going
forward the clang has the support the gcc gcov format or use the
-fprofile-instr-generate -fcoverage-mapping and get ride of gcov
format .
We are planing to customize the clang code coverage for embedded world
,before we start tweaking the gcov / -fprofile-instr-generate
code-base ,we would like to take feedback
2017 Jul 18
4
PGO, zlib and 'default.profraw'
Can we improve the error message here? We should be able to check
zlib::isAvailable and give an error like "profile uses zlib compression
but the profile reader was built without zlib support" or so in this
case.
Xinliang David Li via llvm-dev <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> writes:
> The __llvm_prf_names section is compressed but your llvm-profdata tool is
> probably not built
2015 May 28
2
[LLVMdev] RFC - Improvements to PGO profile support
On Thu, May 28, 2015 at 2:09 PM, Justin Bogner <mail at justinbogner.com> wrote:
> It sounds to me like this documentation just needs some clean up to be
> clearer up front about what's going on. If nobody else gets to it first,
> I'll take a shot at improving the situation when I have a chance.
I just reworked this section a bit in r238504. Dario, does this help?
2017 Jan 25
2
LLVM 3.9.1 build race?
Hi Justin,
> This looks like something I fixed recently, in r290271:
...
...
> The tablegen build adopted USES_TERMINAL for this same reason in
> r280748.
I applied the 2 patches you mentioned above on my 3.9.1 tree and although the build seems to go along nicely than the earlier reported symptoms I can still see LLVMSupport being built a bit too many times than expected.
$ cat
2015 May 27
0
[LLVMdev] GCC compatibility code coverage issue .
Umesh Kalappa <umesh.kalappa0 at gmail.com> writes:
> Hi Justin ,
>
> Thank you for the confirmation and we would like to know that ,going
> forward the clang has the support the gcc gcov format or use the
> -fprofile-instr-generate -fcoverage-mapping and get ride of gcov
> format .
Going forward, the -fprofile-instr-generate -fcoverage-mapping (which
I'll refer to as
2017 Aug 24
3
Building LLVM's fuzzers
George Karpenkov <ekarpenkov at apple.com> writes:
> OK so with Kuba’s help I’ve found the error: with optimization, dead
> stripping of produced libraries is enabled,
> which removes coverage instrumentation.
>
> However, this has nothing to do with the move to compiler-rt, so I’m
> quite skeptical on whether it has worked
> beforehand.
>
> A trivial fix is to do:
2015 May 17
2
[LLVMdev] Building the fuzzer library
I decided to try out the fuzzer library and clang-fuzzer, but it doesn't
seem to build for me. From the cmake files, I was pretty sure all I need
to do is set -DLLVM_USE_SANITIZE_COVERAGE=ON, but with this I get a
number of link errors for "lib/Fuzzer/test/LLVMFuzzer-CounterTest", for
example:
lib/libLLVMFuzzer.a(FuzzerLoop.cpp.o): In function `SetDeathCallback':
2018 Dec 13
2
New LLVM git repository conversion prototype
James Y Knight <jyknight at google.com> writes:
> On Fri, Nov 16, 2018 at 7:40 PM Jeremy Lakeman <Jeremy.Lakeman at gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> Semantic versioning would recommend "v8.0.0-dev", "v8.0.0-rc1" etc. The
>> hyphen indicating that this is a pre-release version coming before "v8.0.0"
>
>
> Here's my proposal:
> -
2015 May 20
2
[LLVMdev] Empty emails from phabricator
Justin Bogner <mail at justinbogner.com> writes:
> I'll go ahead and file one though - more and more people are using phab
> for llvm, so the problems with it are coming up more and more often.
https://secure.phabricator.com/T8269
2017 Aug 24
4
Building LLVM's fuzzers
On Thu, Aug 24, 2017 at 3:21 PM, Kostya Serebryany via llvm-dev <
llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote:
>
>
> On Thu, Aug 24, 2017 at 3:20 PM, Justin Bogner <mail at justinbogner.com>
> wrote:
>
>> I think the simplest fix is something like this:
>>
>> diff --git a/lib/Transforms/Instrumentation/SanitizerCoverage.cpp
>>
2017 Sep 11
2
Building LLVM's fuzzers
Kostya Serebryany <kcc at google.com> writes:
> Justin,
> Calling appendToUsed has horrible complexity and if we call it in
> every function clang consumes tons of memory (6Gb when compiling one
> of the clang's source files). This killed my machine today :)
>
> The solution is to call appendToUsed once per module, instead of once
> per function.
Oh right,
2017 Aug 24
2
Building LLVM's fuzzers
I think the simplest fix is something like this:
diff --git a/lib/Transforms/Instrumentation/SanitizerCoverage.cpp b/lib/Transforms/Instrumentation/SanitizerCoverage.cpp
index c6f0d17f8fe..e81957ab80a 100644
--- a/lib/Transforms/Instrumentation/SanitizerCoverage.cpp
+++ b/lib/Transforms/Instrumentation/SanitizerCoverage.cpp
@@ -256,6 +256,7 @@ SanitizerCoverageModule::CreateSecStartEnd(Module
2014 May 28
3
[LLVMdev] Compiler-RT on Buildbots
On 28 May 2014 17:44, Justin Bogner <mail at justinbogner.com> wrote:
> In the autoconf system, I'm pretty sure compiler-rt's build is triggered
> by a Makefile in clang, tools/clang/runtime/compiler-rt/Makefile. This
> Makefile comments "We currently only try to generate runtime libraries
> on x86", so I guess that's the place to start if you want to get it